|)tncfciep

Gilbert

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM,
Genesis
teuch.
-I.

According to
to the Penta-

With an Introduction Large crown 8vo, $1.75, net.
-XI.
Essay
in

AMOS: An

Exegesis.

Large crown 8vo,

HOUGHTON, MIFFLIN AND COMPANY,
BOSTON AND

NEW

YORK.

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
V

ACCORDING TO GENESIS
WITH AN

I.-XI.

INTRODUCTION TO THE PENTATEUCH
BY

H. G.

MITCHELL

Professor in Boston University

BOSTON AND NEW YORK HOUGHTON, MIFFLIN AND COMPANY
re?& Cambridge
1901

COPYRIGHT,

1901,

BY

H. G.

MITCHELL

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Published October, rgoi

PREFACE
IN a recent issue of a popular religious weekly appeared the following
"
:

Kindly give the name of some book on Genesis which treats from the view-point of modern scholarship."

it

This item indicates a demand for commentaries on
Genesis written
in the light of
its

the results of the most

recent researches into

mand

is
;

really widespread, as

age and structure. The deany one in my position can

testify

but thus far
it.

little

America to meet

The

has been done in England or editor to whom the above appeal

was made, therefore, recommended a translation of Dillmann's work, which, though very valuable to those who
are prepared to appreciate
it,

is

too large, too learned,
Bible.

and too expensive for most students of the
state of things

This

ought not to continue.
it is

A

desire to do

what

I

can to remedy
first

my
is

excuse for putting into

print the following pages.

The

part of

my
I

book

devoted to the Penta-

teuchal question, which
fect candor,

have tried to discuss with per-

myself as well as my reader, in accordance with the evidence in the case. In the
settle, for

and

comments
sis in

of the second part

my

object has been simply

to interpret the text of the first eleven chapters of Gene-

the light of the theory adopted.

The

ideas thus

iv

PREFACE
me
to have intended to
I will

presented are therefore not mine, but those which in a
given case the author seemed to
convey.
If I

have missed his meaning,

cheerfully

acknowledge
tions.

my

error

and make any necessary correcthos'e

There are doubtless

who, at

first, will

feel that

some
I

of

my results

threaten their faith in the Scriptures.
is

can assure them that their anxiety
will discover,
if

groundless, as
:

they

they

will consider
is

(/)

that the

essential element in these chapters

not the things
inti-

narrated, but, as I have

more than once elsewhere
;

mated, the religious ideas underlying them and (2) that these ideas derive much of their importance to us from
the fact that they represent stages more or less remote

by which God prepared his people, and them the world, for the supreme revelation of through himself in the life and work of Jesus of Nazareth.
in the process

A few words with
my
method.

reference to some of the details of

In the matter of proper names

it

at first
;

seemed

to

me

best to follow the English Version

but, at the risk of

being thought pedantic, I finally decided in the translation and the comments to give them forms that would
represent their original pronunciation as nearly as possible with English characters. The scheme adopted is
that most in vogue

among
it

Semitic scholars.
will
'

Those who
'

are not acquainted with
letter practically silent,

note

:

that

represents a

one whose pronunciation resembles that of a forcible rg ; that k, t, and s (with dots

and

under them) should also be strongly articulated

;

that the

PREFACE
that bh,

v

pronunciation of s does not differ from that of s; and dJi, ph, and t/i have the sounds of vt th in this, f,
tk in thin, respectively, while the
//

and

in

gh and kh

calls

for a slight aspiration of the preceding letter.

The

reader should observe that, in this, as in
I

my
is

previous books, where other authors are cited

use see

and compare

in different senses.

Thus See Dillmann

intended to indicate that this author favors the view
expressed, but Comp. Dillmann, that he holds a different
opinion.

make use
students,
edition,
I

In grammatical matters I should have been glad to of the last English edition of Kautzsch's Geseis

nins ; but, since the book
I

felt

obliged to
it is

beyond the means of most cite the second American

a very faulty translation. although have undertaken in this volume to discuss only eleven
I

chapters.

may

later finish the

book

of Genesis, unless

some one

better qualified for the

work

anticipates me.
their studies in

Meanwhile those who wish to continue

this direction wilt find help especially in the
taries

commenTesta-

of Dillmann and Delitzsch, and such works as
to

Driver's Introduction

the Literature of the

Old

ment and Bacon's Genesis of Genesis or the Oxford Hexateuch. Those who read German should also consult
the commentaries of Holzinger and Gunkel.*
* The introduction to Gunkel's book has recently appeared in
English.

CONTENTS
THE PENTATEUCH
Names and
Divisions

.......
'

l
I
.

Traditional Authorship Structure and Composition

.

4
16

Documents and Order ANALYSIS OF GEN. I. -XI

Age

of

of Compilation

...
.
.

36 68
73
73

TRANSLATION AND COMMENTS
Translation

.

.

.
.

/ .

Comments APPENDIX INDEXES
.

.

...
,

.

95 281

.

.

289

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
THE PENTATEUCH
I.

NAMES AND DIVISIONS

parts into

Pentateuch corresponds to the first of the three which the Jews divide their Scriptures. Its Hebrew title is Law.* In the later books of the Old
it is

THE

The Book of the Law of Yahweh The Book of the Law of God (Neh. viii. 1 8), The Book of the Law of Moses (Neh. viii. i), The Book of the Law (2 Chr. xxxiv. 15), The Book of Moses (2 Chr. xxv. 4 comp. 2 Kgs. xiv. 6), The Law of Yahweh (2 Chr. xxxi. 3), The Law of God (Neh. x. 29/28), The Law of Moses (2 Chr. xxiii. 18), and finally, as above, The Law (2 Chr/ xxxiv. 19). f The names given to it in the New Testament are, The Book of the Law (Gal. iii. 10), The Book of Moses (Mar. xii. 26), The Law of the Lord, i e., Yahweh (Lu. ii. 23), The Law of Moses
Testament
(2

called,

Chr.

xvii. 9),

;

The title of the other two parts respectively are Prophets, for Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Minor Prophets; and Writings, for Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Canticles, Ruth, Lamentations, Eccle:

D^VO,

Ezra, Nehemiah, and Chronicles. books only are cited because, as will be shown in the " law " to which proper connection, the they refer probably is, while that referred to in the earlier books certainly is not, the
siastes, Esther, Daniel,
f

The

later

Pentateuch.

2

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
ii.

and Moses (Lu. xvi. 29). speaking, the Aramaic, names are, The Five Fifths of the Law, The Fifths of the Book of the Law, The Five F\fths, and The Fifths* The name Pentateuch, from the Greek, means five-volume,! an d is therefore substantially the equivalent of these Aramaic designations. The five fifths of which the Pentateuch is composed are designated in Hebrew by one or more of the words with which they respectively begin. Thus, the first has for its title the equivalent of In the beginning ; \ the secor simply Names ; the ond, of These are the names third, of And called ; ^| the fourth, of And said** or, In the desert ; ff and the fifth, of These are the words, \\ Words. The Jews also called these books by or,
(Lu.
22),
xii. 5),

The

Law (Mat.

The modern Hebrew,

or, strictly

||

names

the second

Thus, indicating their order or their contents. is sometimes designated as The second fifth ;

the third, as The law of the priests, or, The book of the priests ; the fourth, as Tlie fifth of numbers ; and the
fifth,

after Deu. xvii. 18, as The copy of the /aw. The English names are derived from the Greek but, except
\\

\\

;

*
f

Fiirst,

KAT,6.

an adjective modifying understood; hence it is feminine, rarely masculine. See also the Latin Pentateuchus and Pentateuchum.
original, TrtvrdTtvxos, is properly
/8i'/3A.os

The

t
IT

rptpN-a**
s-ip^v

moa? nbs-o-m-

II

tt

tt

D'nrnn nbw-

O^~Q"T. The same means are employed by the Jews to designate smaller divisions of the Pentateuch. Thus, the third lesson
in

Genesis

(xii.-xviii.) is referred to
xii. i.

these words occur in
lonians

as Get thee (-|^ See also Mar. xii. 26.
in

-j^),

because
their

The Baby-

books.
III!

and Assyrians used the same method See Boscawen, BM, 40.

naming

Fiirst,

KAT,

5

f.

THE PENTATEUCH
in

3

the case of that of Exodus, they

may

easily

be traced

to

Hebrew
It

equivalents.

has become the fashion

among Old Testament

scholars to follow the lead of Bleek in connecting with

the

first five

sion of

the

given are,

books the sixth, thus making the first diviHebrew canon a hexateuch. The reasons that the book of Joshua shares the literary
they

peculiarities of those preceding, but especially that

are incomplete without it.* These reasons, however, are not conclusive. In the first place, if, as some of the

the great work beginning with Genesis included not only Joshua, but Judges, Samuel, and Kings, a hexateuch is as little warranted by literary charactercritics claim,f

a pentateuch. Secondly, the completeness or is >a matter of standthe Pentateuch of incompleteness
istics as

point
ical

;

for,

work,

it

as Bleek himself says, \ although, as a historrequires to be supplemented by Joshua, as
it

a Mosaic law-book

has in Deuteronomy an entirely

That the Jews emphasized the appropriate conclusion. than the historical rather aspect of these books is legal
indicated

by the name that they gave to them. In this aspect they were justified in treating them as a separate division of their Scriptures, and the modern scholar, although he admits their literary and historical relation to the book or books that follow, may imitate their
example.

The book

of

composing the
parts of a
*
f

Joshua may be treated apart from those Pentateuch, but the latter cannot be
entities.

regarded as distinct

They
EH,
.,

are

all
if

whole which would be marred

closely related either of them

Driver,
f.

ILOT,
;

103
f
.

;

Holzinger,
;

4.

Budde, fiS, 268
Kittel,

Moore,
ii.

Jud

xxv.

ff.

;

comp.
168

Cornill,
ff.

EAT, 93 t EAT,

HH,

14

ff.

;

Wildeboer,

LOV,

i2 5 (Eng.i. 343).

4

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

were wanting. To this whole, Genesis may be considered an introduction, and Deuteronomy a conclusion.

The

so-called middle books, Exodus, Leviticus, and are more which Numbers, intimately related to one another than either of the others to them, constitute the

body

of the work.

These

facts,

whatever

may be

the

explanation of them, require that the Pentateuch be regarded as an isagogical unit, and it will be so treated in

the discussion that
II.

is

to follow.

TRADITIONAL AUTHORSHIP

There are parts of the Hebrew Scriptures to which the names of their real or supposed authors are attached. This is the case with the prophetical, and some of the

The English reader might be led to suppose that the books of the Pentateuch belong to this class, since in the Revised, as well as in the Authorized, Version each of them is provided with a title in which it
other books.*
is

the

distinctly attributed to Moses, f The Hebrew title in fact.
is

name, and this

If, manuscripts. neither he nor any other for him took the usual method in other words, the of securing credit for his work
:

This, however, is not each case is the bare an addition to the original not found in therefore, Moses wrote the Pentateuch,

Pentateuch, like

all

the rest of the historical books,

except Nehemiah, is an anonymous production. What does the Pentateuch itself say with reference to All agree that there is nothing in Geneits authorship ?
sis

on the subject but it has been asserted that the middle books claim to have been written by Moses. J
;

* See Jeremiah, Proverbs, Nehemiali,
t

etc.

That of the

first, e\ g.,

reads,

The first book of Moses, com\

monly called Genesis.
\ Keil,

EA

7',

165

;

Harman, IHS,

17

ff.

;

Green,

HCP,

36

ff.

THE PENTATEUCH

5

The passages quoted in support of this opinion, however, when closely examined, will be found to have less force than is attributed to them. When, e. g. as is so often the case, especially in Leviticus and Numbers,* Yahweh
y

spoken to Moses and communicated to him such a statement is not proof that Moses himself put into writing even the law in question, much less that he was the author of the entire work in which it has been preserved. There is nothing in the language used forbidding the supposition that laws thus introduced were transmitted orally for centuries and finally incorpois

said to have

this or that law,

rated into the Pentateuch by an exilic compiler. There is not much more force in the in Moses which is passages
to writing.

represented as having actually committed certain things He doubtless made a record of the attack of

Amalek upon Israel and the sentence pronounced upon them in consequence, although the command to do so alone appears in the history of the Exodus (Ex. xvii. 14).!

He
of

is

Yahweh" on

expressly said to have written "all the words the occasion of the covenant at Sinai

(Ex. xxiv. 4), and a similar statement is made with reference to the stations at which the Hebrews halted on
their

march from Egypt

to

Canaan (Num.
is

xxxiii.

2).

The meaning
be n

of Ex. xxxiv. 28

doubtful, but there can

doubt that the preceding verse warrants one in supposing that, according to the author, the terms of Yahweh's covenant, just recited (14-26), were preserved
[_

* See Lev.
t

i.

i

;

iv. i, etc.

has the definite article before the word for book " but this fact does not warrant one in insisting that the book in question was one in which Moses was accustomed to record whatever took place, for in Num. v. 23 the same expression is used of a book provided for a specific occasion. See Ges. 126,
original

The

"

;

4,

R

;

comp. Green,

HCP,

38.

6

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
by the law-giver.* One can, however, grant that these passages assert or imply and still consis-

in writing
all

tently reject the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch ; since they require one to believe only that four or five

chapters of Exodus and Numbers reproduce with more or less accuracy documents from the hand of Moses. If

they indicate anything with reference to the whole of which they now form a part, it is that the work was comis

This piled from various sources by some other writer. also the natural inference from the use of the third
person wherever Moses appears in the narrative, and the impression produced by the praise bestowed

irresistible

upon him.
fore,

See Ex.

xi.

3

;

Num.

xii. 3.

Thus

far,

there-

the evidence seems to be in favor of Hobbes' aver-

ment,! tnat tne Pentateuch is a book about, rather than by, the hero of the Exodus. There are statements in Deuteronomy which are interpreted
as teaching that Moses wrote, not only this whole of the Pentateuch. Among them the but book, The former says " Moses wrote are xxxi. 9 and 24-26.
this

who bore

law and delivered it to the priests, the sons of Levi, the ark of the covenant of Yahweh, and to the

* The natural subject of the verb wrote in v. 28 is Moses ; but " the ten words " the fact that the words written are described as

seems

to indicate that the author
its

had

in

mind the decalogue of

See inscription on stone by Yahweh himself. xxxi. 18; xxxii. 16. The difficulty is resolved by supposing that the original author of the chapter intended to represent the words
chapter xx. and

w. 14-26 as engraved by Moses on tables prepared for the purpose, and that the present ambiguity of the text " was produced by the addition of the phrase " the ten words to v. 28 to bring this passage into harmony with preceding statements to the effect that it was the words thundered from Sinai which were inscribed on these tables. See Bacon, TTE, 158.
of the covenant in
f

Leviathan, xxxiii.

THE PENTATEUCH
elders
"
;

^

the latter, "

It

came

to pass

when Moses had

finished writing the words of this law in a book until they were completed, that Moses commanded the Levites
ing,

who bore the ark of the covenant of Yahweh, Take this book of the law and place it at the
as a witness against thee."*

sayside

of the ark of the covenant of

may be there

Yahweh your God, that it The weight of

these passages, of course, depends upon the meaning of " the phrases "this law and " this book of the law." They are both of comparatively frequent occurrence in Deuteronomy f hence, if they are used with anything like uniformity, it ought to be possible to discover their im;

" " Now, the meaning of this law is clear enough port. in the first case in which it is used, but in iv. 8 it is abso-

Moses there describes the law that lutely unmistakable. he has in mind as " this law which I set before you this
day,"
ing.
i.

e.

the code which he
" the law

But

is on the point of promulgatwhich Moses set before the children

of Israel," according to iv. 44, commences with v.i, although "the statutes and judgments" are first introi and (according to xxviii. 69/xxix. i), xii. concludes with the twenty-eighth chapter. This is the law to which external or internal reference is made "This book of the law," throughout Deuteronomy.

duced by

;

therefore,

must be the copy
said
i.

with the ark of the covenant.

of this legislation deposited " In addition to this " book

Moses

is

(xxxi. 22)

to

have

left

in

writing the

160) claims that in these passages the composition of the entire law, i. e. the Pentateuch, is so clearly attributed to

* Keil (IOT,

Moses that this doctrine must prevail. See also Green, HCP, 37 Harman, IHS, 119. f "This law" occurs i. 5; iv. 8 (44, "this is the law"); xvii. 18, 19; xxvii. 3, 8, 26; xxviii. 58; xxix. 28/29; xxx i- 9> IJ I2 2 45 xxxii. 46: "this book of the law," xxix. 20/21 xxx, 10; xxxi. 26. The latter in xxviii. 61 becomes "the book of this law."
>

;

8

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
that he

was inspired to sing just before he was These two writings are all that Deuteronomy ascribes to him. There remain several discourses concerning which it is stated only that he delivered them. Moreover there are fifty-one verses and

"song"

taken from his people.

parts

of sixteen others, which, being purely editorial, could hardly be attributed to the lawgiver. In the case of Deuteronomy, therefore, as in that of the three pre-

ceding books, the internal evidence warrants one in affirming, at the most, only that the author of it, whoever he was, incorporated into his work documents, independent, be it observed, of those in Exodus and Numbers, which

he believed to be of Mosaic origin. The testimony of the books called by the Jews " Former Prophets," Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings,
agrees with that of Deuteronomy. Joshua refers to a law given by Moses,* and by him put into the form of a book for the benefit
of Israel, f Still, there is no reason to suppose that this book was the Pentateuch, for all the references to it are in Deuteronomic language, and viii. 30 if., where the ceremony at Ebal is described, " the law " of proves conclusively that it contained only

Deuteronomy. J The only passage in Judges bearing on the question at issue (iii. 4) refers to commandments " given by Yahweh through Moses," but neglects to in-

form the reader whether they were
*
\
i.

oral
f.,

or written.
xxiii. 6.

7

;

xxii. 5.

f
ff.

i-

8

;

viii.

31

34;

See Deu.
;

xxvii. 2
if,

conclusion
of

for

as

is

cannot be cited against this doubtless the case, " the book of the law

Jos. xxiv. 26

was not the kernel of Deuteronomy, reason for believing it to have been the Pentateuch and, whatever it was, it is not attributed to Moses. The English version has " by the hand of Moses," which is literal but misleading; since, as appears from Ex. ix. 35, the
there mentioned
little

God"
is
;

there

as

Hebrew expression

thus translated simply denotes agency.

THE PENTATEUCH

9

The phraseology used, however, makes it evident that, as in Joshua, the Deuteronomic law was in the mind of In the books of Samuel there are no referthe writer. ences to Moses as a lawgiver,* but in the books of
Kings there are several. All of them, like those that have preceded, point to Deuteronomy as the law that their author (or authors) had in view. This is clearly enough the case in I Kgs. viii. 53' and 56 and 2 Kgs. xviii. 6 and 12 but more so in I Kgs. ii. 3 and 2 Kgs. In 2 Kgs. xiv. 6, Deu. xxiv. 16 is quoted as xxi. 8.f a statute from " the book of the law of Moses." Finally, the book found by Hilkiah the priest, and called " the law of Moses" (2 Kgs. xxiii. 25), betrays its identity with some form of Deuteronomy, not only in the names given to it, but by its influence on the language of the historian, and especially on the policy of King Josiah.J
;

* The only passage that one would be tempted to quote in this connection is I Sam. x. 25 but here, as in Ex. xvii. 14, to write in a, literally tke, book means neither more nor less than to put into
;

writing.
f

On
ii.

i

Kgs.

viii. 53,

see Deu.
xiii.

2 Kgs. xviii.

6,

Deu.
x.

Kgs.

3,

Deu.

12

f., xi.

iv. 19 f. on v. 56, Deu. xii. 9; on 5/4; on v. 12, Deu. xxix. 24/25; on i and on 2 Kgs. xxi. 8, i, and xxix. 8/9
; ;

Deu.
J

xxviii, i, etc.
is

The book

also called " the

book of the covenant "
69/xxix.
i).
:

(2

Kgs.
of

xxiii. 2, 21), like
it

Deuteronomy

(xxviii.

The account
e.

contains various other Deuteronomic expressions
to

g.,

" hearken

...
and

do," xxii. 13 (Deu. xv. 5; xxviii.

i,

15); "other gods,"
all

xxii. 17

(Deu.

xiii.

3/2; xxviii.

14, etc.);
vi.

"commands,

statutes,"

xxiii. 3

(Deu.

17);

"with

testimonies, the heart," etc.,

25 (Deu. iv. 29; vi. 5; etc.). Finally, the effects produced by the book were such as Deuteronomy would naturally produce. It filled Josiah with terror and anxiety (2 Kgs. xxii. ri), as one would expect Deuteronomy, especially chapter xxviii., to do under
xxiii. 3,

It furnished the program for a reform such as the circumstances. would be required by Deuteronomy the destruction of idolatry vii. 5, (2 Kgs. xxiii. 4 f., 10-15, 19 f.: see Deu. iv. 15 ff., 23, 25 ff.
:

;

io

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

In view of these facts it is evident that there is no support for the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch in the historical books written before the Exile. Moses is twice (Jer. xv. I Mic. vi. 4) mentioned by
;

the prophets who wrote before the Exile but in both cases, as in Hos. xii. 14/13, where he is not named, he
;

is

appears in the character of a deliverer only. The same the case in Isa. Ixiii. 11 and 12 but in Mai. iii. 22/iv.
;

he figures as the national The law to which Malachi refers, however, lawgiver. as the use of the name Horeb for the sacred mountain would indicate, is probably Deuteronomy.* The extent of the one referred to in Daniel is uncertain.!
4 and Dan.
ix.

n

and

13

The name
the later as

of

Moses occurs nearly twice as often

in

Joshua. J in the books of Kings are repeated.

does in the earlier histories, exclusive of In the first place, most of the references to him
it

It

would be natural

to expect their significance to be the same in both connections. It is clear, This, however, is not the case.
25
f.;

xii.

2f.; xvi. 21

f.

;

xxvii. 15); the suppression of soothsayers,

Kgs. xxiii. 24; see Deu. xviii. io f.); the abolition of high the concentraplaces (2 Kgs. xxiii. 8 see Deu. xii. 4, 13 xvi. 5) tion of worship at Jerusalem (2 Kgs. xxiii. 8 f., 23 see Deu. xii. 5 ff., 26 f. xiv. 23 ff. xv. 19 f. xvi. 2, 6, 1 1, 15 f. xxvi. 2 xxxi. 1 1). * See Deu. i. Wellhausen (SV, V. 202) calls attention 2, 6; etc. to the fact that in Malachi (ii. i ff.), as in Deuteronomy, there is
etc. (2
; ;

;

;

;

;

;

;

;

no distinction between priests and Levites. f Bevan connects the verses cited with v. 2 of the same chapter, and all with Lev. xxvi. 18 ff. Comp. Behrmann. \ He is mentioned only sixteen times in Judges, Samuel, and Kings but thirty-one times in Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah.
;

i Kgs. ii. 3 compare i Chr. xxii. 13 ; with 2 Kgs. xiv. 6, 2 Chr. xxv. 4 with 2 Kgs. xxi. 8, 2 Chr. xxxiii. 8 ; with 2 Kgs. xxii. 8, 2 Chr. xxxiv. 14; and with 2 Kgs. xxiii. 21, 2 Chr. xxxv. 6, 12.
;

With

For

i

Kgs.

viii.

parallels in the

53 and 56, and 2 Kgs. books of Chronicles!

xviii.

6 and 12 there are no

THE PENTATEUCH
y

u

e. g. as has already been noted, that in I Kgs. ii. 3 the author has in mind Deuteronomy; but the introduction of the matter of the temple into the parallel narra-

makes it probable that, in I Chr. xxii. 13, what is meant by "the statutes and judgments which Yahweh commanded Moses " is a more extensive collection. But the most interesting and instructive of these parallel pastive

sages is the Chronicler's account of the reformation under Josiah (2 Chr. xxxiv. i ff.) The author of the books of Kings constantly reminds one of Deuteronomy but in Chronicles the details which produce this impres;

notice of Josiah's passover

sion are either omitted or transposed,* while the brief is expanded into an elaborate

report betraying an acquaintance with the legislation of the middle books as well as with that of Deuteronomy. f

This means that, although, according to the earlier writer, the book found was Deuteronomy, according to the later it " law " was the It is this Pentateuch.
to

completed larger which the Chronicler refers in the additional cases The (except Neh. ix. 14) in which Moses is mentioned. most important are three in which the book made the
basis of the covenant of

444

B. c. is

attributed to Moses.

The

simply describes it as "the book " of the law of Moses but, of the other two, one (Neh. viii. 14.), expressly cites Lev. xxiii. 42 and the other (Neh.
first

(Neh.

viii. i)
:

xiii.

i

f.),

Deu.
vii.

xxiii.

4/3
viii.

f.

See

also

Neh.

x.

30/29

f.,

and Deu.

3

and

n.

Add

to the evidence of

these passages the fact that the

first half of

the prayer

* In Chronicles the purgation of the land

is

described in

much

briefer terms than in Kings, and represented as begun in Josiah's twelfth year (2 Chr. xxxiv. 3) and completed before the discovery

of the law
t

by Hilkiah (v. 8). Notice especially 2 Chr. xxxv. 13; which seems to have been dictated by a desire to harmonize Ex. xii. 8 f. with Deu. xvi. 7.

12

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
Neh.
ix. is

of the Levites in

a rtsumt of the contents of

the Pentateuch, and the identity of the two books seems
established.*
It is possible that the authors of some of the remaining books of the Hebrew canon shared the opinion of that (or those) of the great work now divided into the books of Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah but, since none of them found occasion to connect the name of Moses with the Pentateuch or anything that can be mistaken for it, their attitude on the subject cannot be determined. On the other hand, there is no doubt what the later Jews thought about it. In the Talmud the only question is, whether the words of the Mishna, "Moses wrote his book," f are to be taken absolutely, or with such latitude
;

that the last eight verses of Deuteronomy, describing the death and burial of the lawgiver, may be regarded as an

addition

made by

his

successor. \
it

The extreme view
while to men-

* There are other passages which
tion in this connection.

may be worth

Some

of

them

refer to certain of the con-

tents of the Pentateuch as parts of the law of Moses. vi. 33/48 f. (Num. iii. f. ; Lev. viii. f.); I Chr. xv. 15
15); 2 Chr. viii. 13
ff.)
;

See

i

Chr.
iv.

(Num.

and Neh. i. 7 ff. (Deu. xxx. i The rest represent this law as in the form of a book. See ff.). 2 Chr. xxiii. 18; Ezr. iii. 2 (Num. xxviii. f.); and Ezr. vi. 18 (Lev. viii. f. Num. iii. f.). See also Ezr. vii. 6.
2 Chr. xxx.
ff.);
;

(Num. xxviii. 16 (Num. xviii. I

f.);

2 Chr. xxiv. 6,

9 (Ex. xxx.

11

t

is an excellent example of rabJ It runs as binical dialectics and, as such, well worth quoting.

Baba Bathra, I4b. The discussion of the question
:

follows

"It
law.

is

said that Joshua wrote his

book and eight verses

in the

On what authority is it said, Eight verses of the law Joshua wrote ? On the authority of, And Moses the servant of Yhwh died
wrote,
Is it possible that Moses, while yet alive, there [Deu. xxxiv. 5]. And he died there ? Nay ; but thus far Moses wrote, and
this point

from

onward Joshua wrote.

These are the words

of

THE PENTATEUCH

13

seems to have been the more popular. At any rate, this The is the one adopted by both Philo and Josephus. former declares that " while still alive he [Moses] prophesied admirably what should happen to himself after The his death," * and the latter uses similar language.! Jews were so jealous for the glory of Moses that they would not let even Ezra share with him the authorship of the law. The latter, therefore, was represented, not
R. Judah,
it

or,

some

say, R.

Nehemiah.

R. Simeon said to him, Is

possible that the book of the law wanted a single character, since it is written [Deu. xxxi. 26], Take this book of the law?

Nay; but thus

far the

wrote, and from that point

Holy One, blessed be he, spoke and Moses onward the Holy One, blessed be he,
;

spoke and Moses wrote with tears as is further said [Jer. xxxvi. his mouth he pronounced, etc." 1 8], And Barukh said to them, With * He calls attention to the minuteness with which Moses writes,
"relating how he had died, when he was not yet dead and how he was buried without any one present to know of his tomb because, in fact, he was entombed, not by mortal hands, but by immortal powers so that he was not placed in the tomb of his forefathers, having met with particular grace which no man ever and mentioning, further, how the whole nation mourned saw; for him with tears a whole month, displaying the individual and general sorrow on account of his unspeakable benevolence toward each individual and toward the collective host, and of the wisdom with which he had ruled them." Works, iii. 135 see also 83 f., 1 13 f.
;

;

;

;

clearly intends to attribute all the legislation of the Pentateuch to Moses (AJ, iii. 12, 3 ; iv. 8, 3; 44, 46). also regards Moses as the author of the books in which this legislation is pret

He

He

served (A/, x. 4, 2). He calls them " the holy books of Moses laid up in the temple." Comp. v. i, 17. In his work Contra Apion he is more definite for he says (i. i, 8) that, of the twenty-two books " composing the Scriptures of his people, five belong to Moses ;
:

which contain his laws and the traditions of the origin of mankind until his death." Finally, he asserts (AJ, iv. 8, 48) that Moses " wrote in the holy books that he died which was done out of fear lest they should venture to say that because of his extraordinary virtue he went to God."
;

14

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

as the compiler, but as the inspired restorer, after its destruction, of this as well as the other portions of their
Scriptures.*

Jesus and his early disciples were Jews, and, as such, shared to a greater or less extent the traditional opinions
of their countrymen. They would naturally, therefore, think and speak of the Pentateuch as the work of Moses.

That they actually did thus think and speak,

it

is

very

easy to show. The evangelists, e. g., themselves use the same terms in referring to the Pentateuch as other Jews, and they represent their Master also as employing them.f " uses the terms " law of Moses (Lu. xxiv. 44) and

He
*

The legend
;

is

found

in

4 Esd. xiv.

Ezra says

"
:

Thy

law

is

the things that are done of thee, and the works that shall begin. But, if I have found grace before thee, send the Holy Spirit unto me, and I will write all that hath been done in the world since the beginning, the things that were

burnt

therefore no

man knoweth

written in thy law, that men may find thy path, and that they which " live in the latter days may live God answers " Take (vv. 21 f.).
:

with thee Sarea, Dabria, Selemia, Ecanus, and Asiel, these

five,

which are ready
out
till

to write swiftly, and come hither ; and I will light a candle of understanding in thine heart, which shall not be put

(vv. 24

f.).

the things be performed which thou shalt begin to write." When, after forty days, the work has been completed,
"
:

God commands

The

first

twenty-four that thou hast written
;

publish openly, that the worthy and the unworthy may read them but keep the last seventy, that thou mayest deliver them only to such as be wise among the people " (w. 45 f.).
t The evangelists themselves connect the name of Moses with the Pentateuch as a whole, Lu. xxiv. 27; Jno. i. 17, 45 ; with a particular passage, Lu. ii. 23. Other Jews are represented as attribut-

ing to Moses the Pentateuch as a whole, Jno. ix. 28 f. particular passages, Mat. xix. 7 (Mar. x. 4); xxii. 24 (Mar. xii. 19; Lu. xx. 28); Jno. viii. 5. Jesus is represented as connecting the name of
;

Moses with
31
;

the Pentateuch as a whole, Mat. xxiii. 2
;

;

Lu. xvi. 29,
vii.

xxiv.

44

Jno. v. 45

f.

;

vii.

19; with particular passages, Mat.
xix. 8
f.

viii.

xii.

4 (Mar. i. 44; Lu. 26 (Lu. xx. 37); Jno.

v.

14);

(Mar.

x. 3);

Mar.

10;

vii.

22

THE PENTATEUCH
" book of

15

Moses
in

refers to the Pentateuch

and that
the

xii. 26), but generally, when he he employs the briefer " Moses," such a way as to indicate that the book and

"

(Mar.

man

are associated in his

mind

in the relation of the

the gospel spread among the gentiles, they received with it the Old Testament and the traditions then current respecting its origin.
to its author.*

work

When

Thus the Jewish

doctrine of the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch became the doctrine of the Christian

church,! in which, for fifteen centuries, mitted almost unquestioned.^

it

was

trans-

" Moses * See showed in the Bush " especially the expressions

" " Moses and the Prophets (Lu. xvi. 29). These (Lu. xx. 37) and and other passages of the same sort from the Old or the New

who

Testament are sometimes given a different interpretation, certain feel forced to admit that the Pentateuch was not written by Moses asserting that the terms found in them may have been suggested by the prominence of Moses in the work and the use of
:

" Esther " Esther " in such teaches," etc., is cited in expressions as 20 ff.). The answer is, that support of this position (Briggs,

HCH,

names of persons when connected with books do not always have the same significance that the significance in any given case must be determined by the circumstances under which the name is employed and that, in the case of Moses, the universal prevalence,
the
; ;

about the beginning of the Christian
the Pentateuch,
is

era, of the belief that

he wrote

good ground for assuming that, when his name was connected with the book by the writers of the period, especially if the book was cited as an authority, the terms used expressed, and were intended to express, the current doctrine. f The passages from the remaining books of the New Testament bearing on this subject are the following: The Pentateuch as a whole is attributed to Moses, Acts vi. u, 14; xiii. 39; xxi. 21; xxvi. 22; xxviii. 23; I Cor. ix. 9; Heb. vii. 14; x. 28; particular
passages, Acts
|
iii.

22; xv.
ii.

I

;

Rom.

x. 5, 19.

Origen (C.

Cels.

54)

adopted the

stricter

Jewish doctrine.

16

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
III.

STRUCTURE AND COMPOSITION

discussion just concluded has shown that, although the Pentateuch itself does not claim to have been written

The

by Moses, and
existence, the

earlier authorities persistently ignore its

New

Testament, as well as the later books

it to him, and this is the traditional doctrine of both the Jewish and the Christian church. The question now arises whether the testimony of the

of the Old, attribute

last

two

authorities

is

to

be accepted as

decisive.

There
;

are those

who reply without

hesitation in the affirmative

arguing that even the latest of the sacred writers were so much nearer the Mosaic age than modern scholars that it
is

or

impertinence in the latter to question the statements implications of the former, that this impertinence

becomes presumption in view of the inspiration of the writers quoted, and that the offense amounts to impiety when Jesus' relation to the subject is considered.* These arguments are as weak as they are unfair. In
reply to the first it is only necessary to say that, if, as is generally admitted, the value of testimony depends upon the distance of the witness from the event to which he
testifies, it certainly is

not favorable to the traditional

doctrine that the support for it comes from witnesses none of whom lived within a thousand years of the time
of Moses.

The second argument

inspiration insures infallibility ; a doctrine for is no ground in reason or experience, and of
is

takes for granted that which there

which there no example in the history of revelation. The third is as good an example of the argtimentum ad verecundiam as could be cited. It should neither deceive nor terrify anybody. The truth is, that Jesus never claimed to be
*

Green,

HCP,
ff.

33

;

Harman, IHS, 258

f.

;

Lex Mosaica

(G.

Rawlinson), 44

THE PENTATEUCH
on the other hand, on
at least

17

one occaomniscient, but, sion (Mar. xiii. 32), confessed that his knowledge was limited.* There is, therefore, no impiety in facing the of discovering another example of such limitapossibility tion, and asking in all humility and reverence, whether the Pentateuch can have been written by Moses a question the answer to which involves a careful study of the structure and composition of the work. One cannot proceed far with the examination proposed
;

without suspecting that the Pentateuch is not the product of a single pen. In fact this idea suggests itself to
the unprejudiced mind at the outset for there is nothing clearer than that the first two chapters of Genesis con;

tain

two accounts

of creation,

i.

i-ii.

4a and

ii.

40-25,

dif-

fering from each other in almost every respect in which they may be compared. In the first place, there is a de-

The most striking found in the names given to the Creator, God being the one used in the first, and Yahweh (God} that employed in the second account f but there are several others of almost equal importance. \
cided difference in their vocabularies.
this

example under

head

is

;

* See also Lu.
ing to Jno. xvi.

ii.

52.

Some

12,

where Jesus

prefer to meet this point by appealis reported to have told his disci-

ples that there were

many things ples but could not, because they
or appreciate them
;

which he wished to tell his disciwere not prepared to understand

and explaining that the authorship of the one of the things reserved for future revelation, the discussion of which he avoided by adopting
Pentateuch

may

well have been

the language, but not the opinion, of the day (Briggs, HCH, 29). f This difference was noticed by some of the Christian fathers,
e.

g. y Tertullian (Adv.
iii.

Hermogenem,

c. 3)

and Augustine (De Genesi

ad litteram,

2); but its significance was misunderstood. % Thus, e. g,, in the first account the word that describes God's creative activity is either the generic term HIPS, make (i. 7, 16, 25,
ii. 2, 3), or the more specific S~O, create (i. 4); while in the second, although rttt72 is found

26, 31

;

i,

21, 27
4,

;

ii.

3,

(ii.

18),

the

i8

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

Secondly, not only are the words used in the two accounts largely different, but those of the first are different in kind from those of the second. Indeed, the style

one varies throughout from that of the other the literal and prosaic, while the second is as noticeably picturesque and poetical.* Thirdly, while these narratives agree in certain fundamental matters, e. g., in tracing the origin of the world to an intelligent God, and placing man first among his creatures, it must be acknowof the
first
;

being

ledged that, in the details of creation, they are clearly and irreconcilably divergent.! Finally, these narratives
more
(ii.

characteristic term is

12% form

(ii.

7, 8,

19),

or nD3, build

In the former N!P, go forth, is used of both plants and animals (i. 12, 24), in the latter the corresponding words are TO2, sprout (ii. 5, 9), and "IS** (ii. 19). Finally, the first account generally
22).

has \ns, earth
the earth
9, 19),
(i.

(i.

ii,

25, 30),

12,24, 26, 28, 30), and \nsn mil, beast of where the second has nETS\ ground (ii. 5, 6, 7,
19, 20).

and rntt?n nTl, beast of the field $\.

peculiarities of the style of the first account are seen in the logical character of the narrative, the uniform structure of the
it is composed, and the recurrence of cognates such expressions as SttH S N ttnn, lit. green greenness (i. ii), lit. seed seed (i. 12), 3HT \nttf V"" ^' lit- swarm a swarm There is none of this formality in the second account. (i. 20), etc.

*

The

sections of which
in

mm,

1

One of It produces the impression of a series of dissolving views. the most vivid and delightful of these pictures is that in which Yah weh is described as first moulding man into shape, as a potter would fashion a dish, and then breathing into his nostrils, thus
transforming the hitherto

The lifeless clay into a living creature. description of the creation of the animals is equally vivid, while the last words, " but for man there was not found a help meet for
him," gives it an element of pathos. t The second is not so complete an account of God's work as the first but this is not si) remarkable as the fact that they do not
;

In the first God is repreagree in the details common to them. sented as creating vegetation (i. n ff.), animals (i. 20 ft.), man (i. The second begins where the first ends 26 ff.), one after another.

THE PENTATEUCH
give evidence that they were written from points and with different objects in view

19

different stand;

the

first

being

the work of some one, doubtless a priest, devoted to the study of Hebrew institutions, the second, that of a prophet, or some one else whose interests were predomi-

nantly ethical and religious.* The example cited is not a solitary instance. One after another the reader discovers a succession of duplicates, whose existence cannot be explained on the supposition that the

Pentateuch

is

the work of Moses or any

If he is at all critical he also disother single author, f covers places in which parallel passages have been inter-

(ii.

7),

but postpones the creation of

woman

(ii.

21

ff.)

until after

that of vegetation (ii. 8 ff.) and animals (ii. 19 ff.); and this order is intentional, for the author evidently thought that vegetation was
originally dependent

on the care

of

man and

that

woman

was, in a

sense, an afterthought. * Note that the interest of the first account culminates in the

the second

sanctification of the sabbath, while the most significant thing about is the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
:

The story of \ The following are among the most noticeable the covenant of God with Noah has two forms, Gen. viii. 20-22
and ix. 8-17; so, also, that with Abraham, Gen. xv. and xvii. Gen. xx. and xxvi. i-i I are clearly but two versions of one tradition. The same is just as evidently the case with xxi. 22-32, and " xxvi. 12-31. The origin of the name " Bethel is described in two different passages, xxviii. 10-22 and xxxv. 9-15; Jacob twice receives the name " Israel," Gen. xxxii. 22-32 and xxxv. 9-13 and there are two lists of the dukes of Edom, Gen. xxxvi. 15-19 and
;

40-43. Nor are these repetitions confined to Genesis. In Exodus the revelation of the name Yahweh is narrated in iii. 13-15, and In chapters xii. f. there are duplicate directions again in vi. 2-7. concerning the passover, xii. 1-13 and 21-27; tne feast of unleav-

ened bread, xii. 14-20 and xiii. 3-10; and the first-born, xiii. i f. and 11-16. Inxxxiii. 7-11 there is a fragment of a second account
of the tabernacle.
Finally,

Deuteronomy is

largely a repetition of

the history and legislation of the three preceding books.

20

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
into

composite narratives. the of the Flood, Gen. vi. 5story good example The substance of it is, that, the earth having viii. 14.
less consistent

woven

more or

A

is

corrupt, God determined to destroy it, and actua deluge, in which every living thing, exceptcaused ally ing Noah and his family and a few animals, perished and

become

;

so long as one reads clear and coherent.

it

in outline only,

it

seems perfectly
;

Not

so

when one asks how many

animals were preserved, or how long the deluge lasted for on these points its statements are so divergent that one is forced to attribute them to different authors.*

The
most

The

incongruity of parts of the Pentateuch appears when one undertakes to trace its chronology. story that Abimelech, attracted by the beauty of
clearly

Sarah, took her from her supposed brother (Gen. xx.), is not in itself improbable. The difficulty in believing it arises from the fact that it is so placed as to make the

woman
See
sort of
xvii.
is

ninety years of age when she was kidnapped. 1 7. But the most convincing illustration of this
in a series of references to
xxxviii.)

found

Judah, the son

have married a daughter of the Canaanite Shua, by whom he had three sons (vv. 2 ff.). After the youngest of these was grown one of (v. 14.), Tamar bore him two sons (vv. 29 f.) when the Hebrews had two sons whom, Perez, migrated
Jacob (Gen.
is

He

said to

;

to

Egypt

(xlvi.

12).

I, xli.

46, 53,

and

xlv. 6,

Yet, according to xxxvii. 2, xxxviii. the time within which all this

occurred was only twenty-two years.^
* There are

These
sort.

facts can

many

other examples of this

The most

in-

structive are the story of the banishment of Jacob, Gen. xxvi. 34xxviii. 9 ; of the sale of Joseph, Gen. xxxvii. of the mission of the
;

spies,

Num.

xiii.

f.

;

and of the
the ages of

rebellion of

Korah and

others,

Num.
f

xvi. 1-35.

An

attempt to

fix

Dinah and her brothers when the

THE PENTATEUCH

21

only be explained on the theory of diversity of authorIt must therefore be admitted that the Pentateuch ship. a compilation. The only question concerns the number of writers represented and the process by which their contributions were united into a single work.
is

The

first

effect of the discoveries described is to con-

fuse the student, and incline him to conclude that the Pentateuch is a mass of fragments,, whose authorship it
useless to discuss, thrown into its present form at a comparatively late date by a careless or incompetent comThis is the conclusion actually reached by Spinoza piler.
is

sis,*

(1670), the father of the so-called Fragmentary first proposed, as such, by Geddes ( 1 8cx)),t

Hypotheand fully

incident narrated in Gen. xxxiv. occurred will disclose other similar
difficulties.

* Spinoza (TTP, ix.) thus expresses himself: "Any one who but observes that in these five books precept and narrative are jumbled together without order, that there is no regard to time, and that one and the same story is often met with again and again, and occasionally with very important differences in the incidents, whoever observes these things, I say, will certainly come to the conclusion, that in the Pentateuch we have merely notes and collections to be examined at leisure, materials for history rather than
digested history itself." f Geddes' statement, found in the preface to his (unfinished) translation of the Bible (xix.), runs as follows " Moses, who had been taught all the wisdom of the Egyptians, most probably was
:

Hebrew writer, or the first who applied writing to historical From his journals a great part of the Pentateuch seems to have been compiled. Whether he were also the original author of the Hebrew cosmogony and of the history prior to his own days, I would neither confidently affirm nor positively deny.
the
first

composition.

He certainly may have been the original author or compiler; and may have drawn the whole or a part of his cosmogony and general
history,
;

both before and after the Deluge, from the archives of

Egypt and these original materials, collected first by Moses, may have been worked up into their present form by the compiler of

22

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
:

developed by Vater (1805), who states it as follows "The books of the Pentateuch consist of a multitude of sepasmall, some very small, concerning not that they were composed with reference to one another, and for the purpose of being

rate pieces, large

and

which

it

is

clear,

attached to one another, but the contrary. Further, among these separate pieces many are evidently, and most at
least probably, by different authors. The more probable opinion ... is, that a considerable part of Deuteronomy existed from, at the latest, the age of Solomon or
. .
.

David, that separate pieces which we now find in the Pentateuch were gradually composed, and that the collection had a later origin, perhaps toward the time of the Exile."*

These supposed fragments, however, when examined, are found to have affinities in accordance with which
they arrange themselves in series with well defined characteristics. Thus, e.g., one version of the covenant with Noah (Gen. ix. 8 ff.) calls the Deity God, and otherwise reminds one of the first account of creation while the other (viii. 20 ff.) uses the name Yahweh, and, in general, follows the style of thought as well as language of the
;

the

second account. Indeed, almost the entire contents of first nineteen chapters of Genesis can be classed as

either Elohistic or Yahwistic.

The same

is

true of the
;

remainder of the

first

four books of the Pentateuch

but

from the twentieth chapter of Genesis onward there are two kinds of Elohistic materials, only one of which can have been supplied by the source of. Gen. i. and Ex. vi. 3,
the Pentateuch in the reign of Solomon. But it is also possible, and, I think, more probable, that the latter was the first collector, and collected from such documents as he could find either among
his

own
CP,

people or
iii.

among

*

the neighboring nations."

504, 680.

See also Hartmann,

HKF,

584.

THE PENTATEUCH

23

the other being furnished by the writer (or writers) whose " " is explained in Ex. iii. preference for the name God

On the other hand, nearly the whole of Deuteronomy written in a style, and characterized by a tone, of which there is hardly a trace in any of the preceding books.*
14.
is

There are two ways
first place,

of explaining these facts

:

In the

one might suppose that the original work was

a homogeneous document in the style of the Elohist or the Yahwist, and that the remaining contents of the Pentateuch were added by successive revisers. This
was, in fact, at one time the prevalent theory.
It is

the

Supplementary Hypothesis, broached by Kelle f (1812), of which Bleek is perhaps the best representative. His state-

ment

of

it

(abridged)

is

as follows

:

J

"

The

first

contin-

uous historical work, distinct traces of which appear in the works remaining to us, dealt connectedly with the history from the creation up to the death of Joshua, or up
to the occupation

and partition of the land
all
.

of

Canaan

;

and

its

composition took place, in
. .

time of Saul.
Elohist.

This work

probability, in the is that of the so-called

...

It

contained the bulk of the contents of

the

first

four books of our Pentateuch, also the account

Moses (substantially Deu. xxxiv. 1-8), and the greater part of the book of Joshua. This work was enlarged and revised by a somewhat later author, probably in the time of David, and in not quite
of the death of
. . .

* There is difference of opinion with reference to the amount of Deuteronomic material in the first four books, but Gen. xxvi. 5, Ex. x. 2, xv. 26, xix. 4-6, xx. 3b-6, xxiii. 24 and 32 f., and xxxiv. 12 f. and 15 f., at least, seem to be of this character. He asked, " Could not Genesis be represented t VWMS, iii. as a book, originally well arranged, whose plan has been disturbed by a large number of interpolations due to the successive crystallization of oral traditions current

among

the people

?

"

\

EAT,

141

ff.

(Eng.

i.

362

ff.).

24

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
last of his reign.
;

the

basis

but

it

The older document remained the was enlarged by many new sections, a part

of which the author found already written, a part also being oral traditions which he himself put into writing.

document were also, to and alterations, or abridgments and omissions, being made where thejehovist used further sources respecting the same circumstances and events. Next came the last revision of the work by the author of Deuteronomy* from whom it received the form and extent which it now presents in the PentaThe composition of teuch, and the book of Joshua. and the last revision of the Pentateuch, in Deuteronomy all probability, are to be referred to the reign of King
narratives of the
earlier

The

some

extent, revised, additions

.

.

.

.

.

.

in the first half of the seventh century B. c." Colenso, the former bishop of Natal, also, was an advocate

Manasseh,

of this hypothesis.f
*

De Wette

(1805)

was the
:

first

to recognize in

Deuteronomy an

independent document of the seventh century B. c. " The Elohistic f This is his form of it story in Gen. i.-Ex. vi. written in was the latter 5 part of Samuel's time, perhaps by Samuel himself after the rupture with Saul. The writer . . left it now to be filled up and continued by younger hands. Accord.

.

.

.

ingly, this

was done by the Jehovistic writer or
.

writers of the fol-

lowing age, trained, no doubt, in the same school and under the very From the time when the O. S. was completed, eye of Samuel. ... in the early years of Solomon, with the addition of the older I and 2 Samuel, and i portions of Judges and Ruth, Kings, till the the work remained untouched . days of Jeremiah . retouched and enlarged it in his (the Deuteronomist), who own prophetical style, and ultimately inserted the law in Deu. v. ff., the discovery of which gave rise to Josiah's reformation (2 Kgs. xxiii.). To this he added, some time afterwards, the introduction, Deu. i.-iv., and the later chapters xxix. f., as well as the
.
.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

history of the kings from Solomon downwards, contained in the two books of Kings. . Finally, during the first years of Jehoachin's
. .

THE PENTATEUCH
The Supplementary Hypothesis was
but
it

25

finally

had to be abandoned because

widely accepted it did not
;

take into account that the so-called supplemental portions of the Pentateuch are more closely connected with one another than with the context in which they are found, and

when taken by themselves, they form as complete a narrative as one could hope to recover from a composite
that,

production.
content,
is

These, however, are the facts. Thus, the second account of creation, as is shown by its form and
not a supplement to the
first,

but an introduc-

tion to the story of the Fall (iii.), the first genealogy (iv. I, i6b-24), a notice of Noah (v. 29; ix. 20-27), etc.

But these

tic as well as

facts require one to suppose that the Jehovisthe Elohistic portions of the Pentateuch

When, originally constituted an independent document. therefore, in the progress of research and discussion
they had been established, the Supplementary gave place
to the

Documentary Hypothesis.
;

logically comes last in of theories passed in review nor did it obtain the favor that it now enjoys until the other two had been

The Documentary Hypothesis
list

the

tried

and found wanting

;

but, as a matter of fact,
it

it

is

the oldest of the' three, for
its

memoirs, or of which concerned the creation of memoirs, fragments the world, the universal deluge, the history of the patridifferent
captivity, Ezekiel followed the example of Jeremiah . His work was taken up, xviii., xx., and xxvi.
. .

This is inventor, in 1753. had, I believe, collected twelve

was proposed by Astruc, its original form "Moses
:

by writing Lev. during the Cap.
.

have received some touches even after that time " (PBJ, Part VI. 616 ff.). See also Tuch, Genesis.

and after it, by a series of priestly writers. Very probably Ezra, and the priests his companions, had a large share in this work, and it seems to have been brought very nearly to a close in his days, so far as the Hebrew text is concerned though it may
tivity
. ;

26
archs,

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
his

and especially that of Abraham and his posterity. purpose he arranged these, either entire or in twelve different columns, and placed each in extracts,

For

memoir or fragment in the place appropriate for over against other corresponding parts or fragments, thus compiling a work in twelve columns. Perhaps,
part of a
it

however, to avoid the confusion of so

many columns, he We arranged all his memoirs in only four columns. should be happy, and much pains would be spared, if Genesis had come down to us in this form. But the
. .

.

copyists

long ago disarranged

it

in transcribing it." *

These suggestions were at first received with ridicule, and an attempt by Ilgen (1798) to improve upon them f was
* CG, 432 ff. This hypothesis, be it observed, was originally intended to serve as a defence of the Mosaic authorship of the
Pentateuch.
f Ilgen's

work
:

is

entitled

Die Urkunde des jerusalemischen
I.

Tempelarchivs in ihrer Urgestalt,

In

it

(425)

he states his

" After a careful examination of the text of theory as follows I have in which Genesis, faithfully followed the clues furnished by the headings, the frequent repetitions, the divergence in language

and tone, and the varying and entirely contradictory contents, I have found that the documents which the collector had before him and combined belong to three different authors, of whom two use I call those who use the the name Elohim, and the third Jahveh. name Elohim, or the Elohists, Sopher Eliel (God is my God\ to indicate that they are characterized by the use of the name Elohim; but the one who uses the name Jahveh I call Sopher Elijah (My God is Jah\ because the portions that belong to him are distinguished by Jahveh. To distinguish them from each other, I give to one Eliel the epithet Harishon (the first), and to the other the epithet Hashsheni (the second); Elijah, also, has the epithet Harishon. In the latter case it may seem superfluous, since he stands alone, and therefore does not need to be distinguished from any other but it is
;

possible that, in the future, he

another

may make

not remain the only one, that his appearance, when the distinction will be

may

necessary."

THE PENTATEUCH
ignored
;

27

but a form of Astruc's theory championed by Eichhorn (1780), who extended his researches through the Pentateuch, for a time enjoyed considerable favor.*
This, however, was finally superseded by the

Supple-

mentary Hypothesis, whose prevalence even Ewald, with his elaborate and ingenious modifications (1843), was not
able to prevent.f
It was Hupfeld (1853) who, having independently, as he claims, reached the result published fifty years before by Ilgen,J gave the deathblow to the Supplementary

* The following is the form in which he put it in the fourth (1823) edition of his Einleitung : " The first book of Moses was compiled
of fragments from two works by different authors. ... It seems to me probable that the two documents were brought into the form
in

which we now have them at the end, or soon after the end, of the The contents of the last four books of Moses Mosaic period.
.
.

.

prove that, with the exception of late additions, they are derived entirely from documents contemporaneous with the Mosaic legislation.
self,

The

Not that all these documents were written by Moses him. but a great part of them by some of his contemporaries. Mosaic books seem to have received their present division
.

.

and form between Joshua and Samuel." (iii. 64, 93, 334, 350.) t The following is Ewald's view in its final (1864) form finds in the Pentateuch and Joshua the work of seven hands
:

He
(i)

:

the
of

by a Judaite who wrote about the beginning Samson's judgeship (2) the Book of Origins, by a Levite who

Book

of Covenants,

;

wrote soon after the dedication of Solomon's temple (3) a third version of the primitive history, by an Israelite of the tenth or the ninth century B. c.; (4) a fourth element, by a Jew of the ninth or the eighth century (5) a fifth, by the compiler of the preceding
;
;

Jew of the second half of the eighth century; (6) Deuteronomy, by an Egyptian Jew of the latter half of the reign of Manasseh (7) the editorial additions of the final compiler, who completed the work about 700 B. c. (///, i. 64 ff.) t He says in the preface (viii. ff.) to Die Quellen der Genesis that, although he had read Ilgen's book, he had entirely forgotten it until his own was nearly finished then he came upon it and found in it much of which he had supposed himself the discoverer.
sources, a
; ;

28

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
:

Hypothesis and revived its neglected rival. He epito" There lie at mizes the contents of his book as follows in genof Genesis the Pentateuch of the foundation (and
eral)

two
:

Distinct cycles of legends or

tradition

... an

older, simpler,
.

riched and adorned.
called

.

.

forms of national and a younger, enThe former we have in the so.

.

.

latter chiefly in the Jahwistic portions of the Pentateuch ; along with which, however, a younger Elohist appears in connection with the princi-

Elohim document, the

Both [of pal characters in the theocratic history. these last] forms of legend must have been independent The of each other, and independently recorded.
.
. .

.

.

.

combination of the three documents in the present whole must be simply the work of a later editor." * The publication of these results marked the beginning of a new period in the history of Pentateuchal criticism for, from that date, the Documentary Hypothesis has grown in
;

favor,

and

it is

now,

in

some form, accepted by nearly

all

recognized authorities in biblical criticism.f

The

prevalent

compilation from
intact

at least four

hypothesis makes the Pentateuch a documents. These docu-

ments, being the work of as

many different

authors,

when

presented linguistic and other peculiarities by which they were readily distinguishable. The excerpts from them have, in some cases, been handled so freely in
the process of compilation that it is difficult, if not imbut as a rule they have been possible, to separate them
;

preserved
little

in so nearly their original

form that there

is

room

In
*
f

fact,

doubt with reference to their authorship. the Pentateuch has been analyzed, and the greater
for

QG, 98 ., 193, 195Klostermann (Der Pentateuch,

1893),

who

still

of the Supplementary Hypothesis, is one of the

prefers a form few exceptions.

THE PENTATEUCH

29

part of its contents more or less satisfactorily referred to one or another of the documents in question.*

V

The work from which
an
extract,

the

first

account of creation
calls

is

whose author

(or authors)
first

was formerly known
the Deity

as the Elohist because at

he

God

(elohim), and the first Elohist, to distinguish him from the one discovered by Ilgen, is now generally called the

Code, or the Priestly document, and more briefly designated as PC or simply P, f because it was evidently written from the sacerdotal standpoint. In one view it
Priests'
is

for

the most important of the sources of the Pentateuch it furnished, not only the framework of the whole, but
;

the largest share of the materials of which it is composed, including, according to the best authorities, about a fifth
of Genesis, nearly a half of Exodus, the whole of Leviticus, nearly three-fourths of Numbers, and a few verses
in

of the race,

Deuteronomy. It began with an account of the origin and traced the history of the Hebrews and

their institutions as far as the occupation of Palestine. The style of the extracts from it, even after Ex. vi. 2,

where the name Yahweh is introduced, J is unmistakable. It is logical and orderly beyond that of either of the other
documents.
It is also

very precise, abounding

in literal

* For a complete analysis of the Pentateuch, see Driver,
for a comparative

ILOT;

Holzinger,

EH.

view of the results reached by the leading critics, The composition of the Pentateuch is indicated
;

by Bacon (GG; TTE) by various sorts of type by different colors. See also Oxford Hex.
f Dillmann, t

by Haupt (SBOT)

On
f.

who has a system of his own, designates it as A. the significance of this passage, compare Green, HCP,

100

noticed.

" Priestly portions of Genesis into books of generations."

The form of the first account of creation has already been The same peculiarity is illustrated by the division of the
See
ii.
;

4 (displaced)

v.

i

;

vi.

9

;

etc.

30

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

and technical terms,* and in circumstantial definitions.! The contents of the document were largely legal, chronological, and genealogical at any rate, this is the character of most of the portions of it that have been preserved. J
;

characterized by comparatively developed theological ideas, with an evident avoidance of the marvellous features of Hebrew tradition, as well as the

They

are

also

anthropomorphic and anthropopathic language found in other parts of the Pentateuch. One does not look for
literary effect in a

work

of this sort

;

yet there are pas-

literal tendency of P than those found in the vocabulary of the first extract from it, Gen. i. i ff. ; e. fo=become, i. 2; appear, i. 9; bring, g., God, create, i. I cause to go, forth, i. 12 etc.; the word brood (A V, move) being a noticeable exception. Compare also the word for beget in Gen. v. 3, for destroy in vi. 13, for make, of a covenant, in xvii. 7, for offer; ;

* There are no better illustrations of the

ing in Lev. i. 2, etc., with those used in Gen. iv. 18, vi. 7, xv. 17, iv. 4, etc. For a list of the linguistic peculiarities of this document see Driver, ILOT, 131 ff. Holzinger, EH, 338 ff. Oxford Hex. i. 208 ff. f See the phrases, "and it was so," Gen. i. 7; "after its kind," " after " on the same " and he i. ii; their died," v. 5 day," vii. 1 1 Note also the fulness of mere detail in such families," x. 20, etc. passages as Gen. vi. 14-22, ix. 8-17, and xvii. 10-14. J It is this document which explains the origin of the sabbath and circumcision in Genesis (ii. i ff. xvii.), and records the complete development of the Hebrew religion in the legislation of Ex. xxxv.-Num. x. It is also the document to which we are indebted for the genealogies of Gen. v. and xi., containing the only biblical data for a chronology of the early history of the race. The point here made may be illustrated by citing at random almost any passage from this document for which there is a parallel
: ; ;
;

;

in the first four books of the Pentateuch. Compare, with especial reference to the use of anthropomorphisms, the first and second accounts of creation ; and with reference to the introduction of the

9 ff. with

marvellous, Gen. xvii. with xv. (the covenant with Abraham), xxxv. xxviii. 10 ff. (the name Bethel}, and Ex. vi. 2 ff. with iii. i ff.

(Moses' commission).

'

THE PENTATEUCH

31

sages taken from it in which certain subjects are treated with a dignity that makes them deeply impressive.*

The second account
because
it

of creation

is

from

J,

*.

e.,

the

Jahvistic (more exactly Yahwistic) document, so

named

To
in

this

document

generally calls Godja/ive/t, or, better, Yahweh. is referred about a half of Genesis, a

sixth of Exodus, a fifteenth of

Numbers, and a few verses

Deuteronomy.

are recognizable other books this criterion

The Yahwistic portions of Genesis by the divine name employed.! In the
is

of less service.

There

are,

however, other marks by which they can generally be distinguished, especially from extracts from the Priestly

document.

The remains
its

of the Yahwistic

work show

author (or authors) were predominantly religious, and that he wrote the history of his people for the purpose of imparting instruction in the truths that bear upon national and individual life and
that the interests of

from the records and Hebrews, therefore, are not regarded as a body of statements whose authenticity is to be guaranteed, but as a collection of illustrations, which may be expanded and embellished, and thus made to teach more clearly and eloquently than they otherwise would the The style is free and lessons to be learned from them.
character.
materials, gleaned

The

traditions of the

* The

first

account of creation

is

generally considered a fine

example of the sublime, and Gen.

an almost equally good one It should, however, be observed that of the pathetic, in literature. the impression made was evidently not intended on the part of the author; that, in fact, it is produced in spite of peculiarities that
xxiii.

would
f

The name

spoil the effect of less impressive subjects. " God " occurs, also, without doubt as the original
;

reading; e. g., Gen. iii. i xxxii. 28; xliii. 29. In other cases it has been inserted, either with Yahweh, as in Gen. ii. f., or instead of it, as in Gen. vii. 9. See the Vulgate.

32

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
;

and poetical * therefore always insometimes and highly dramatic, f The theoteresting, and nai've is primitive, God, e. g., being sometimes logy as possessing tangible parts and not only represented,
flowing, picturesque

displaying

human

passions, but as associating familiarly

with men.J

The
teuch

is

third source used in the compilation of the PentaE, the Elohistic document, so named because its

author (or authors), like that of P, at first calls God a fact Elohim. It has certain points of contact with J,
which, with the added circumstance that the extracts from these two are more closely interwoven with one another than with those from other sources, sometimes makes it difficult to decide to which of them a given pasThere are, sage of the Pentateuch originally belonged.

however, criteria

as far as Ex.

iii.

14,

the divine

name
most

by which some,

at least, of the critics claim in

* The picturesqueness of the second account of creation has already been noticed (p. 18 f.). For a list of the linguistic peculiarities of this document, see Holzinger, EH, 93 ff. or Oxford Hex. i. 185 ff. ; for additional illustrations of vivid description, Gen. ix.
20 if.; xi. i ff.; xv. 10 f., 17 f.; etc. Note also that the strictly poetical portions of the Pentateuch are largely from J e. g.^ Gen. xlix. 2 ff. ix. 25 ff. ; xxv. 23 iv. 23 f.
; ; ;

f The majority of the passages in the Pentateuch most interesting from the literary standpoint are from the Yahwistic document. See the story of the Fall (Gen. iii.), of the destruction of

Sodom and Gomorrah
xxiv.), etc.

(Gen.

xix.),

of the mission of Eliezer (Gen.

Perhaps the prettiest picture from this source is that of the meeting between Jacob and Rachel (Gen. xxix. 2 ff.); the most dramatic, and one of the most effective in any language, is
Judah's plea for Benjamin (Gen. xliv. 18 ff.). J He makes a sound as he walks in the garden in Eden (Gen. iii. 8 f .) repents of having made man (Gen. vi. 6) comes down to
;

;

see the city and tower of Babel (Gen.

xi. 5);

visits

Abraham and

accepts his hospitality (Gen.

xviii.

i

ff.);

etc.

THE PENTATEUCH

33

The result of the cases to have settled the question. analysis is, that the Elohist is credited with having furnished more than a fourth of Genesis and Exodus, about a ninth of Numbers, and, like the rest, a few verses of Deuteronomy.* These parts of the Pentateuch betray
the prophet's zeal for religion and morality, but it is minIn gled with an interest in theology and archaeology.
other words, they abound, on the one hand, in traces of reflection on the things of God, and on the other, in details that no one but an antiquary would have inserted
into his narrative, f
It is

probably an interest in antiqui-

ties, rather than a taste for poetry, that accounts for the fragments of ancient songs preserved in this document. \

At any
of the
tive,

rate,

although there are fine passages, the style
less picturesque,
J.

work

is

and

in general less attrac-

than that of

* For a complete analysis, which Driver does not attempt, see Bacon (GGj TTE) or Oxford Hex.; for a comparison of the

views of the various critics, Holzinger (EH ii.). a list of the linguistic characteristics of E (181
y

The
ff.);

latter gives so also Ox-

ford Hex.
f

i.

190

ff.

theological bent manifests itself in the use of the name Elohim, in the character of the theophanies described (Gen. xv. I ; xx. 3 ; etc.), in the instances of providential interference narrated

The

(Gen. xxii. 13

xxxi. 9; xlv. 7 ; etc.), etc.; the archaeological, in the ; preservation of the names of Eliezer (Gen. xv. 2), Deborah (Gen. xxxv. 8), Potiphar (Gen. xxxvii. 36), etc. also of Mahanaim (Gen.
;

xxxii. 21

Noxxxvii. 17), Pithom(Ex. i. 11), etc. tice, finally, in this connection the allusions to idolatry among the early Hebrews (Gen. xxxi. 19 ff.; xxxv. 2 ff.). from the " Book of the is in the
.),

Dothan (Gen.

\

It

E

which

is

found

quotation
f.).

Wars

of

Yahweh" (Num.

xxi. 14

See also Ex. xv.

21

;

xvii.

16; etc.

The
(Gen.

sacrifice (Gen. xxii.
xlii.

best Elohistic passages in the Pentateuch are Abraham's i ff.), Joseph's first interview with his brethren

8

ff.),

and the finding of Moses (Ex.

ii.

i

ff.).

34

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
The
is

teuch

fourth element in the composition of the PentaD, the Deuteronomic. The document so desig-

nated

is

Its individuality is

found incorporated in the book of Deuteronomy. even more marked than that of either

It is distinctly a prophetic production, of the others. aiming directly at the accomplishment of certain results, chief among which are the suppression of idolatry, the centralization of the worship of Yahweh, and the development of the moral and religious life. The ideas that

underlie these aims, the unity and spirituality of God and the supreme duty of loving him (iv. 15 ff. vi. 4 f.), are an advance upon the teachings of either J or E, but the style of this document, though fervid and lucid, is often diffuse, discursive, and repetitious.* The decomposition of the Pentateuch on the lines in;

dicated explains

many
;

of

the peculiar
of the

phenomena

ob-

served, and removes many

immemorial

difficulties

encountered, in it but there are other phenomena that are not explained, and other difficulties that are not removed by so simple an analysis. Thus, e. g., Gen. iii. and
iv.

are assigned to

J,

and they certainly display through-

* The tendency to diffuseness shows itself especially in the enumeration of particulars. See iv. 6, 9; vi. 7, 10 f. vii. 13 f. The second fault is well illustrated by xii. 6, 18; etc. viii. 7 ff. the way in which the statutes and judgments, which first iv. i, and then vi. i, leads the reader to expect without further preparation,
;

;

;

Inare postponed until the twelfth and the succeeding chapters. stances of repetition are numerous. Thus the promise of restoration from captivity in iv. 29 ff. recurs in xxx. I ff. ; the injunction

concerning the remembrance of the law, found in vi. 6 ff., appears again in xi. 18 ff.; etc. Certain phrases peculiar to the document, such as " that it may be well with thee," etc. ; " that thy days may

be long,"
" with
all

etc.

;

"the place which Yahweh
etc.,

thy heart,"
ff.

are

many

ther peculiarities, see Holzinger,

EH,

shall choose," etc.; On the furtimes repeated. 282 ff. Driver, ILOT, 98 ff. ;
;

Kuenen,

OCH, no

;

Oxford Hex.

i.

200

ff.

THE PENTATEUCH
but the tree of

35
;

out some of the leading characteristics of that document life in iii. is a disturbing as well as an un-

representation of
first city, is

necessary feature in the story of the Fall, and in iv. the Cain, or his son, as the founder of the

hardly in harmony with the curse pronounced the murderer. These and other more or less apparupon ent discrepancies indicate that the work in question, when
it was incorporated with one or more of the others composing the Pentateuch, was not in its original form, but had been enriched with materials some of which may

have been derived from other writings
indications in the other

;

* and similar

justify the conclusion that they, too, were the products of a process of development. The original work may be designated as J 1 etc.,
,

documents

and later forms or additions as J 2 J 3 etc. There are two distinct processes by which one can imagine the Pentateuch as having been compiled from the documents that compose it. In the first place, they might all have circulated as separate works until the last had reached its final form, and then have been put together by a single editor. The other process would be the gradual one, by which two of the documents would first be united, and this compilation afterward enlarged by the addition, one after the other, by the same or dif, ,

ferent editors, of the remaining two. Now it is agreed that the editorial additions discoverable in the Pentateuch

are not

all

by one hand, and

that, therefore, the

former

of these processes is not the one by which the compilation was actually produced. There remains, however, the

question, whether this editorial

done by two compilers.
Budde,

work may not have been Dillmann and others claim that

* For details concerning the composition of this document, see BU; Bruston, DJ'; Holzinger, EH, 142 ff Kuenen, OCH, 250 ff. Oxford Hex. i. 108 ff., 117 ff., 141 ff.
.

;

;

36
it

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

was, three of the documents being put together by the and the one remaining united with the work thus * but the produced by the second majority of critics insist that the phenomena presented can only be explained
first,
;

on the supposition of a threefold redaction. The order of compilation, and the reasons for the theory adopted with reference to it, will be discussed in the next chapter.

IV.

AGE OF DOCUMENTS AND ORDER OF COMPILATION
established.

The Documentary Hypothesis seems
any
rate, it

At

has been adopted by the leading Old Testament scholars of the day as the most satisfactory solution
of the question of the origin of the Pentateuch yet suggested.! There is some divergence of opinion with re-

ference to the analysis of its contents; but it mostly touches minor matters concerning which perfect harmony is not important. :f It is the final question respecting the dates of the several documents and of the stages in the
process of compilation to which the most divergent answers have been given. On this critics divide themselves
* See Dillmann, NDJ, 671 ff.; Kittel, HH, i. 132. Note, however, that they do not agree in their answers to the question, which three entered into the original compilation Dillmann's formula for P. the Pentateuch being PEJ D, and Kittel's EJD
;

+

+

American opponent was the late Professor Green of Princeton, whose The Higher Criticism of the Pentateuch has already been cited. See also his Moses and the Prophets, The Hebrew Feasts, The Unity of Genesis and a discussion with
t Its sturdiest
,

President Harper in Hebraica for 1888-91. The leading English conservatives have presented their case in a joint production under the title Lex Mosaica, edited by R. V. French.
\

The

ysis, exhibits

among

following table, based on Holzinger's comparative analboth the degree and the character of the divergence five acknowledged authorities concerning the Yahwistic

THE PENTATEUCH
into

37

two

schools, one of

which places J before

E

and P

after the Exile, while the other insists that E is older than J and that P originated before the overthrow of

Judah.*

Of

course,

to present

all

it is impossible, in this connection, the evidence on which the adherents of

element in Gen. xxi.-xxx., the first ten chapters following the extended extract from the Elohistic document
:

first

38

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
;

it would only confuse any one but an expert ; but perhaps enough can be two revisions before they were united. D appeared just before Josiah's reforms, and, after circulating for some time in two editions, produced after the fall of the Jewish monarchy, and finally taking a form combining the peculiarities of both, was combined with JE

these schools base their conclusions

The rest into a single work. Ezekiel. The nucleus of it is
about which was formed
of writers, during

of the Pentateuch is

later

than

(the four, quatuor, covenants), a conglomerate, the product of a school

Q

and after the Exile. In 444 B. c. this Priests' code had been completed by the addition of Lev. xvii.-xxvi., wrought into JED, and divided into six books, the first five of which were the law promulgated by Ezra. Kuenen's statement of Graf's theory (OCH) is more elaborate, varying, also, in some respects from that of Wellhausen. J, he
thinks,

was composed
;

800

B. c.

E

in the

in the northern kingdom before, or about, same country about 750. In the second half

of the seventh century there had appeared Judean editions of both of them, which were united into a single work about 600. D, which was written in the reign of Josiah, after various additions, was combined with JE during the Captivity. Finally, P, itself a

during, or after, the Exile, was brought to Judea promulgated in 444, and, before 400, wrought into the preceding work to form the Hexateuch in substantially its

compilation

made

by Ezra

in

458

B. c.,

present dimensions.

The most prominent
schools above described

representative of the second of the two
is
:

Dillmann,

who

states his

view (NDJ,

593 ff.) about as follows sources of the Hexateuch,
is to

of the (his A), though not the oldest is only less ancient than (his B), which

P

E

be assigned to the first half of the ninth century B. c., while J (his C) dates from the middle of the eighth. About 600 these three were wrought into a continuous whole, to which D, written in the reign of Josiah, was added during the Exile. Finally, by the insertion of parts of Lev. xvii.-xxvi. and other related legislation (his S), also various legal fragments, and the separation of Joshua from the rest of the compilation, the law of Ezra, and the
Pentateuch in substantially its present form, was completed. Kittel, who is also a conservative, but differs on some points from Dillmann, thus states his conclusions E was written near the be:

ginning, J toward the end, of the ninth century

B. c.

The

original

THE PENTATEUCH
adduced to indicate what
is

39

likely to

be the outcome of

the discussion in progress. The inquiry into the age of the Pentateuch

may

best

since it has been preserved more nearly begin with complete than any of the other documents, and has certainly left more distinct traces of its influence than they
;

D

in the history

and the

literature of the

Hebrews.

This

document, as has already been shown, is the book on which were based the reforms of the eighteenth year of

King
ence.

Josiah.

There

is

no doubt of
it

its

subsequent

exist-

From

that time

was known and recognized as
later prophets, especially Jere-

the law of Yahweh.

The

miah,* repeatedly betray their acquaintance with, and their indebtedness to it, while the author (or authors)

who

put into their present form the books of Kings constantly gives evidence that it was not only his literary model, but the standard by which he decided how he

This of Deuteronomy was a product of the reign of Manasseh. last, after various additions, was united with the two preceding,
hitherto distinct, documents during, or just before, the Captivity. Meanwhile P, the oldest parts of which, perhaps, date from the
It was cartime of Solomon, had, grown to its final proportions. ried by the Jews to Babylon, where it was worked into the previous compilation. The whole thus produced, minus the book of Joshua, was the law promulgated by Ezra. * For a list of passages (86) from his prophecies, in which the

influence of
1873, 671
ff.

most apparent, see Zunz, ZDMG, Deu. xciii. or Oxford Hex. i. 87 ff. Jeremiah not only uses a large part of the vocabuhe appropriates whole phrases and senlary of the earlier book

Deuteronomy

is

;

for a less complete one, Driver,

;

tences.
xi.

The
iv.

following are good examples

:

vii.

23 (Deu.

v.

30/33);

4 (Deu.

24).

The

20); xvi. 13 (Deu. xxviii. 36); xxii. 8 (Deu. xxix. 237 instances of this sort are so frequent and noticeable that

(GHS, 32) and Colenso (PBJ, Part VII. 225 ff.) among their number, formerly held that the prophet was the author of both books.
several distinguished scholars, Gesenius

40

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
men and the events
of

should regard the
is

It is therefore impossible to

deny that D, in

Hebrew history.* some form,

as early, at the latest, as the date of Josiah's reforms. In 2 Kgs. xxii. 8, Hilkiah is represented as saying that

he had found the book sent to the king. The natural implication is, that it had previously been known and lost, and that, therefore, the author of this passage believed that it was not a recent production. That this his and the the was of school to opinion, opinion really which he belonged, is clear from xxiii. 25, where he calls the book discovered "the law of Moses," and a series of related passages, cited in another connection, which teach
that
existed at various dates subsequent to that of the Exodus, and that it was always recognized as the work of
it

the law-giver, f The evidence thus far adduced

is explicit

and seem-

ingly conclusive ; but, before the case is closed, it should If be subjected to a closer examination. really was

D

written by Moses, and was known as his work at certain dates, it ought to bear marks of its Mosaic origin, and

the other works written before

it

was

lost, if it

was

lost,

ought to bear traces of its influence.
*

If the authors

The Deuteronomic
For an

discussed.
ix. 1-9.

The

character of 2 Kgs. xxii. f. has already been example in the same style, see i Kgs. influence of the Deuteronomic idea of the centralizaearlier

tion of worship at Jerusalem appears in the latter; but it is more apparent in i Kgs. xiv. 21, and the passages in which the commen-

dation bestowed upon the good kings before Josiah is modified by the significant statement, "but the high places were not taken

away,"
f

i

Kgs. xv. 14

;

xxii.

43

;

etc.

in question are those cited (pp. 8 ff.) in proof of the claim that " the law of Moses " in the Former Prophets is

The passages

Deuteronomy.
6; Jud.
xxi. 8.
iii.

They
i

are Jos.
ii.

i.

7 f.

;

viii.

31

f.,

34; xxii. 5;

xxiii.
;

4;

Kgs.

3;

viii.

53, 56; 2

Kgs. xiv. 6;

xviii. 6, 12

THE PENTATEUCH
who
are

41

known
of

to

Deuteronomic

historian,
it,

have written before, according to the it can have been lost betray no

knowledge its Mosaic

the testimony of the
j

same
;

historian to

origin will

ustly

be questioned

and

if

the

internal evidence clearly contradicts him, while he is not to be rashly condemned as a falsifier, his statements on

the point under discussion must be ignored. The first Scholars are generally question is easily disposed of. while that, Jeremiah constantly reminds one of agreed

Deuteronomy, and most
or less degree betray
cies of
its

of the later writers to a greater

Amos, Hosea,
it

Isaiah,

influence,* the genuine propheand Micah leave no such
xviii.

impression.f
withstanding,

Hence, 2 Kgs.
is

6

not probable that

to the contrary notit was in existence

when these prophets flourished. The second question requires more extended treatment. The evidence derivable from Deuteronomy itself is of In the first place, the book may be exvarious kinds. amined from the linguistic standpoint. The result of
such an examination
it

is

unfavorable to the opinion that

belongs to the earliest period of Hebrew literature. The use of the word prophet is significant in this connection.
it is

It occurs nine times yet I Sam. ix. 9 says that a comparatively late term, that the man of God was called a seer until after the establishment of the mon;

The general style of the book should also be archy. considered. It has not the freshness and picturesqueness
of early

Hebrew, but an

oratorical breadth
22; Neh.

and
Dan.

diffuse-

* See Eze. xx.; Mai.
*

iv. 4/iii.

i.

5 ff.;

ix.

4

ff.;

etc.

f

On

the passages

of their acquaintance with

by these prophets usually cited as evidence Deuteronomy, see Driver, Deu. Ixii. f.
;

Riehm,
54
f.

EA T,

i.

332

ff.

;

comp. Keil,

EA T,

i.

171

ff.

;

Green,

HCP

y

42
ness,

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
already noticed, which belongs to an advanced

stage of literary development.* The local and historical indications agree with the linguistic. The phrase " bein the use made of it, implies that the book, or the part of it in which this phrase occurs, was written, not in Moab, but in Canaan, f and the comparison " "as Israel did to the land of his possession (ii. 12), that

yond Jordan,"

was penned after the Conquest. J If it be objected ii. 10-12 and 20-22, and iii. n and 14-17, the last of which is later than the period of the Judges, are This law glosses, the same cannot be said of xvii. 14 ff.
it

that

* See Dillmann,
f

NDJ,

611; Kittel,

HH,

\.

61

f.

expression beyond (Heb. *"Qm), where it is supplemented by an explanatory clause denoting direction, may mean either side with reference to the speaker or writer. Thus supplemented, it is
xi.

The

used of the same side, Jos. i. 15 v. I xii. 7; of the opposite, Deu. 30 Jos. xii. i xiii. 8. When not modified by such a clause, in all cases, save one, in which its meaning can be ascertained from
; ; ; ;

the context, it denotes the side opposite that, actual or assumed, of the speaker or writer. The examples of this sort are Deu. iii.
Jos. ii. 10; vii. 7; ix. 10; xxii. 4; xxiv. 2, 8, 14; Jud. v. 17; i8;Jer. xxv. 22. This being the case, while one can infer nothing with reference to the standpoint of the writer from Deu. iv. 41 ff. or Jos. ix. i, it is fair to conclude from Deu. i. i and 5 that the author of the introduction of Deuteronomy, at least, wrote in
20, 25
;

xi.

western Palestine.

See also Jud. x. 8 and i Sam. xxxi. 7. The exception above mentioned, Deu. iii. 8, without doubt a slip of the See farther, Ezr. viii. 36; Neh. ii, pen, confirms this conclusion.
iii. 7; i Kgs. v. 4/iv. 24; Isa. viii. 23/ix. i; the last two of which were written in Babylonia. \ The interpretation which makes this passage refer to the conquest of the kingdoms of Sihon and Og (Keil) is, to say the least,

9;

unwarranted.
It

and
13;

in another in Jud. x. 3
i

embodies a tradition found in one form ff. See also Jos.
ii.

in

Num.
30;
i

xxxii. 41,

xiii.

Kgs.

iv.

Chr.

22

f.

On
14

the relation of these various passages, see

Driver on Deu.

iii.

ff.,

and Moore on Jud.

x. 3

ff.

THE PENTATEUCH

43

concerning the king is a part of the body of the book, and evidently Deuteronomic. But it is plain from I Sam. viii. f. that neither Samuel, nor the author (or authors) of these

was acquainted with any such provision.* Hence must be later than the account of Saul's election, which the most conservative scholars do not think of
chapters,
it

placing before the date of the division of the kingdom, about 930 B. c.f The law providing' for a court of appeals at Jerusalem (xvii. 8 ff.) has been supposed to indicate that it is later than the reign of Jehoshaphat but it
;

is

hardly

fair, in

view of the estimate

now put upon

the

testimony of the Chronicler, to quote 2 Chr. xix. 5 ff. in support of this position. The passage should rather be Of greater sigexplained as an echo of Deuteronomy.
nificance are iv. 19 and xvii. 3 for they seem to point to the time of Manasseh, by whom the worship of "the " See 2 host of heaven was revived, if not introduced.
;

Compare, however, 2 Kgs. xvii. 16, where sins for which Israel was destroyed. Better evidence that the book is a product of the seventh century B. c. is found in its teachings. The doctrine concerning the prophet seems to require such a concluThe earliest prophets were men, not of words, sion. but of deeds and so great was their influence in the affairs of their times, that even kings (i Sam. xvi. 4 Amos and I Kgs. xxi. 27) dreaded their displeasure. those who followed him were preachers. They threatKgs.
xxi.
3.

this

is

among the

;

;

fulfilment of their

ened, indeed, but they did not undertake to insure the own prophecies. Finally there arose a class of prophets
*

who merely

reflected the wishes of

On

the relation between this passage and Deuteronomy, see

ILOT, 175 if.; Deu. 212 f.; Budde, Wellhausen, CH, 243 ff. GI, 259 ff.
Driver,
;

RS

t

183

f.

;

comp.

f

SeeKeil,

^7;

i.

245fL

44 their

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
more or

less powerful patrons, and who, by thus the wicked in their offences, hastened the encouraging retribution. Now the prophet of Deuteronomy of day

Moreover, he is expressly con(xviii.) is a preacher. trasted with the false prophet, and a test is suggested (vv. 21 f.) by which the one may be distinguished from
the other.

Hence

this passage,
is

and the document to

probably to be referred to the seventh century, when, as is known from the prophecies of Jeremiah, the distinction between the true and the false prophet needed emphasis.* The same result
it

which

belonged,

is

reached

if

the doctrine of the centralization of wor-

The earlier prophets, although they speak of Jerusalem as the abode of Yahweh (Am. i. 2 ; Isa. viii. 18), do not require that all his worshippers shall pay homage to him in the temple erected by Solomon. They could not have done so for, since the kingdom had been divided at the instigation of the prophet Ahijah (i Kgs. xi. 30 f.), and the erection of a separate government implied the establishment of a distinct worship, the doctrine that Yahweh could be approached acceptably only at Jerusalem would have been an attack
ship be considered.
;

upon the divinely guaranteed independence of Israel, and, if taught within the kingdom, would justly have been punished as treason. When, however, the northern kingdom had been overthrown, and it had become possible to
religion,

make Jerusalem

the sole shrine of the

Hebrew

Hezekiah, doubtless under Isaiah's direction,
earlier references to false prophets are Mic. Hi. 5
Isa. ix.

ff. and an interpolation. Jeremiah repeatedly refers to them, sometimes devoting long passages to polemics xxiii. 15 ff.; xxvi. 4 ff against them. See especially xiv. 13 ff In the last case the test suggested in xxvii. 9 ff. and xxviii. 9 ff.

*

The
iii.

Zph.

4.

15/14

is

.

;

.

;

;

Deuteronomy

is

applied.

THE PENTATEUCH
;

45

took the first steps toward this end * and seventy-five years later Josiah, in accordance with a book, in which

meanwhile an unknown prophet

(or prophets)

had given

to old material a form and setting adapted to the needs of his generation, succeeded for the time being in con-

centrating worship in the place which Jehovah had eviThus, all the internal dently chosen for his sanctuary.

evidence obtainable points to the conclusion that the Deuteronomic document had its origin in the seventh

century
Josiah.

B.

c.,

before the restoration of the temple by

It is possible that this

work

is

the one found by Hil-

kiah, but

onomy
In the
in its

;

cannot be identified with the book of Deuterfor this latter is not the work of a single author.
it

first place,

as already noted,

it
;

contains various

fragments from the other documents f and secondly,

more characteristic portions it gives evidence of having passed through the hands of at least one editor. The fewest changes and additions are found in chapters
xii.-xxvi.

These

chapters, therefore,

in

their earliest

form, have sometimes been identified with the original Deuteronomic document.^ But the last verse of xxviii.
* See 2 Kgs.
xviii. 4, 22.

2 Chr. xxx. 5 says that he sent his

invitation to the passover with which he celebrated the reopening of the temple "from Beersheba even unto Dan."
f

According to Driver (SLOT, 72) traces of the other documents

are found only in chapters i., xxvii., and xxxi.-xxxiv. ; but Bacon (TTE, 262) refers to E x. 6 f. and parts of xxv. 17-19. See also

Holzinger,

D

EH, ii. 10; Oxford Hex. ii. 246 ff. I See Wellhausen, CH, 195. According to Cornill (EAT, 25), consisted of xii. i-xiii. I (in a shorter form) ; xiii. 2-19 ; xiv. 3,
;

21 ao*, 2ib
xvii. 7 (in

(?); xiv. 22-xv. 3; xv. 7-23; xvi. 1-8*, 9-20; xvi. 21a different connection) xvii. 8-13*; xviii. i-i3;xix. 1-15, 16-20*, 21 xx. (except 2-4 and 15-18); parts, no longer determinable, of xxi.-xxv.; xxvi. 1-15. See, farther, Holzinger, EH, 263 ff.
;

46
(697 xxix.

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
i)
;

with them
it

was evidently meant to connect this chapter and, in fact, they seem incomplete without

There are similar reasons for believing that chapters The v.-xi., in some form, belonged to the first edition. title prefixed to them was undoubtedly intended to connect them with xii.-xxvi., and the points of likeness between the two parts seem to show that they belong together.* The relation between i.-iv. and the two following parts of the book is not so close as theirs to each These chapters, therefore, with the exception of other. the first verses of and the last of iv., are by many attributed to an editor or reviser. Driver, however (Deu., the genuineness of i.-iii., and finds little diffiIxvii.), defends culty in believing that iv. also is the work of the author The truth probably lies between these opposing of v. ff. views for, while a good part of the chapters under consideration falls below the higher Deuteronomic standard, it is not true that the style and content are throughout In other words there is a mixture in them inferior. of two elements. The inferior passages are generally marked by the use of the plural of the second person,
i.
;

when

Israel

is

addressed.

Nor

is

this their only lin-

guistic peculiarity.!

Moreover, where the

plural

pronoun

xi.

* For a detailed discussion of the language and contents of v.as compared with xii.-xxvi., see Kuenen, OCH, 112 ff also
.

;

Westphal, SP, ii. 105 ff.; Driver, Deu., Ixv. ff.; Mitchell, 1899, 69 f. f Various words and expressions characteristic of the Deuteronomic style are either not used where they were to be expected, or used in senses more or less different from those in which they
appear in other connections. On the other hand, these passages have some words and phrases rarely or never found except in them or in similar passages in other parts of the book. Thus, while the *' covenant " of these passages is the one made at Horeb (iv. 13, 23 see also v. 2, 3, etc.), that of those in which the singular is used
;

/#,

THE PENTATEUCH
prevails

47

peculiar prominence is usually given to the events that transpired at Horeb, and peculiar hostility toward idolatry manifested.* These passages constitute

the greater part of the first four chapters. Among them are interspersed others with the singular of the second

genuinely Deuteronomic.f
is

person, in which both the style and the standpoint are The latter, or most of them,
the covenant with the fathers
farther,
(iv. 31; see also vii. 9, 12, etc.). " eyes have seen (iv. 9; see also vii. 21 etc.) with the singular, and "eyes have seen" (iii. 21; see also xi. 7), with the plural. Finally, four of the seven

Compare,
19; x.
iv.

"

which

.

.

.

;

3

;

words and phrases quoted by Kuenen (OCH, 121) to prove that
these chapters are not by the same author as v.-xxvi. are peculiar, not to these chapters as a whole, but only to the portions of them under consideration. (See especially the name Amorite, i. 7, 19,
etc.)
;

and the same
ff-

is

true of six of the eight terms supposed to

betray the influence of
1899, 71

P

(Driver, Deu., Ixxi.).

See

farther,

JBL,

* When merely alluding to the theophany, iv. 10, Moses uses the singular pronoun; so also w. 33 and 36; but when he undertakes to describe it, w. 11-14, the plural. This fact, however, might be overlooked, if, on returning to the subject in the
ninth chapter, he did not again change numbers (v. 8), and use the plural to the end of his long (ix. 8-x. 5) account of the tables
of the covenant.
x. 10.

See also the framework of chapter
is

v.

;

but comp.

the case with the subject of idolatry. In iv. 19 the worship of the heavenly bodies is forbidden in the singular ; but the four preceding verses, with their detailed prohibition of the

The same

vii.

use of images, have the plural. See also iv. 23, 25, 28 vi. 14 4 f., 25; ix. 12-21 ; xi. 16; xii. 2-4; xx. 18 xxviii. 14; xxix. 16/17 f., 24/25 f. and note that the verses cited, or the longer
; ;
; ;

passages to which they belong, generally have the marks of interpolations. Comp. viii. 19; xiii. 3/2, 7/6, 14/13 (?); xxviii. 36;
xxx.
f
17.

For examples of the literary character of this element, see ii. The tone and purpose of the 7 and 25, but especially iv. 37-40. latter passage are also to be noted, being precisely those found in vi. 4-13, and the other most characteristic portions of the book. The

48

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

are probably remnants of the original introduction to D, and the parts of xxvii., xxix., xxx., and xxxi. in the same
style the remains of the conclusion of the document.* The dimensions of the original document having thus

been indicated, the question recurs, whether it was the book discovered by Hilkiah the priest in other words, whether the changes which it finally underwent, or any of them, were made before its recognition as the law of Moses. The account of the reforms instituted upon its
;

discovery indicates that it required, not only the centralization of the worship of Yahweh at the capital, on which
other passages in which the singular
is used are only less strikingly Deuteronomic. * Dillmann (NDJ, 378) objects to the genuineness of chapters xxix. and xxx. on the ground that they contain certain words and phrases not found elsewhere in Deuteronomy. The objection, however, holds against parts of xxix. only for all but two of the twenty expressions cited are in this chapter, and, in fact, with one further exception, in the parts of it in which the second person is plural.
;

Moreover, of the exceptions, one, PI13, is really Deuteronomic, which it has in xxx. 17 in occurring with the meaning impel xiii. 6/5, 1 1/ 10, and 14/133, and in the sense expel which it has in xxx. i and 4 in xxii. i while the other, nbs, oath, curse, although
;

occurs six times in both chapters (xxix. 11/12, 13/14, 18/19, 19/20, 20/21 ; xxx. 7), is so variously used that it can hardly be pronounced characteristic. The further objections (Driver, Deu.^ Ixxiii. f.), that the connection in these chapters is sometimes imperit

fect,

and that the standpoint in parts of them is different from that undoubted portions of the book, are likewise relieved by Of course, referring the disturbing element to a second author. no one who admits the genuineness of xxviii., or the substance of
of the

can reject xxx. i-io because, like iv. 30 f., it presents a prospect of return from captivity. promise of this sort is the natural expression of faith in a future for the chosen people at any time after the overthrow of the kingdom of Israel. See Jer. xvi. 14.
it,

A

On

the language of these final chapters see further

JBL,

1899,

74ft

THE PENTATEUCH
Deuteronomy
the
is

49

rival cults against

a unit, but also the utter extinction of which those parts of the present

plural of the second person is used were It seems necessary, therefore, to directed.* evidently conclude that the two elements of which Deuteronomy

book where the

mainly composed were united before the year 62 1 B. c. How long before ? is the next question. Many hold that the book reported found had its origin just before the date of its discovery (Reuss, GAT, 35off. Kuenen, OCH, 2 14 ff. Dillmann, NDJ 613 etc.), and some that, in fact, Hilkiah had a hand in its preparation, or was in colis
; ;
y ;

lusion with

its

author or authors.
first place,

EAT,
W.

30.

But, in the

See especially Cornill, there is no proof that

Hilkiah was playing a part in the matter, and, second, as R. Smith maintains (OTJC, 363), the fact that, ac" cording to 2 Kgs. xxiii. 9, the priests of the high places

Jerusalem shows that neither he nor any of his colleagues could have dictated or indorsed Deu. xviii. 6-8, where express provision

came not up

to the altar of

Yahweh

in

"

is made that the rural Levite, who comes to the central " shall minister in the name sanctuary for the purpose, of Yahweh his God." If, however, the book was actually found, the probabilities are that it was lost before

Josiah came to the throne, and that, therefore, it had attained its actual dimensions in the reign of the wicked

and idolatrous Manasseh. The process by which

it

had become what

it

was

when

discovered, according to the latest theory, was that of compilation a document, itself composite, whose au;

thor (670

B. c.),

when

freely writing, naturally used the

* On the first point, see 2 Kgs. xxiii. 21-23, where the first celebration of the passover at Jerusalem is described; and on the second, the passages already cited (pp. 9 f.) to show that the book

found was some form of Deuteronomy.

50

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

plural of the second person in addresses to Israel, being wrought into an earlier compilation, whose author (690
B. c.)
B. c.),

always employed the singular, by a redactor (650 who added more or less as he proceeded.* But

the general similarity of style and tone in the laws, in spite of the variety of their content, indicates that, with some exceptions, they were brought together by a single
collector while, on the other hand, the affinity between the additions attributed to the redactor and the supposed
;

contributions of the author of the later of the documents used seem to justify the inference that the two writers were one.f In other words, it is probable that the book found by Hilkiah was a revised and enlarged edition, if

one may use the term, of the work of the
teronomist.

Those portions

original Deuof the present book which

cannot be referred to one of these two sources must be
attributed to later editors, compilers, or transcribers.
* This
Sg.
is

tributes the material used

the view of Steuernagel (DJ, vi. ff.), by the redactor (Deu., iv.

who
if.):

thus dis-

vi. 4f., 10-13, 15; vii. i-4a, 6, 9, I2b-i6a, 17-21, 23 .; 2-5, 7-14, 17 f.; ix. 1-43, 5~7a; x. 12, 14 f. 21, (22?) ; xi. 1012, 14 f.; xii. 13 f., i6-2oa, 21, 26 f ; xiv. 23ao, 24-27^ 28-29a; xv. 19 f.; xvi. i f., 5-7, 9-11, 13-15, 18*; xvii. 8*, lob ; xviii. I f.*,
viii.
.

3
4,
i

f.,

6,

8; xix.

2,

36, 4~8a, 9b, 10*, 15-19
f.,

io/9ao*, ii/iob, 13/12

6-7a, 8; xxiii. 16 f.*, f., 7-15, 18; xxv. 1-3,

a*; xiii. 2/i-4/3a, 6/516/15-18/17; xx. io-i7ao, 19 f ; xxii. i20, 25 f.; xxiv. (6), 10-22 ; (xxv. 4); xv.
.

n-i2a;

xxvi.

2*,

5~i5a;

xxviii.

i-8a,

!2-i3a, 15-20*, 23-25a, 43-46; xxx. 14, I9b-2o; xxxi. 900, 10, lib. iv. 45 ; v. 1-4, 20/23-28/31 ; ix. 9, 11, 13-17, 21, 25-29; x. PL 1-5, 11, i6f.; xi. 2-5, 7, 16 f., 22-28; xii. i*(?), 8, 9*, 10 f., 12*;
xvi. 2i-xvii. 7, 8a*, 9*, 11-13*; xviii. io-i2a; xix. 3a, (3-7*), iif., (14); xxi. 1-4,6-8, 10-23; xxii. 5, 9-29; xxiii. 1-4, 8-15, 18 f., 22-24; xxiv. 1-5, 7; xxv. 5-10, I3~i6a.
f evil

On

the

first

point see,
xiii.
:

from thy midst,"

nagel's PI.); etc.
5

e. g., the use of the phrase put away 6/5 (Steuernagel's Sg.); xvii. 7 (Steueron the second, the condemnation of idolatry, vii.

"

and 25 (Steuernagel's R);

ix.

13-17 (PL);

etc.

THE PENTATEUCH
There
is

51

no doubt about the relative age of D and the other prophetic documents. It is certainly, even in its
for it is largely original form, later than either of them a reproduction of their contents. This indebtedness of D to J and E is most apparent in the legal portions of
;

Deuteronomy some of its statutes being copied almost verbatim from the other documents,* while others are laws from J or E varied or expanded as they would nat;

urally

conditions

be by a fluent writer,! or modified to suit the under which the Deuteronomic document

The historical portions of Deuteronomy originated.^ also betray the acquaintance of its authors with both the
Yahwistic and the Elohistic narrative.
It

appears in

various incidental allusions scattered through the book,
*
(Ex.
f

Examples:
xxiii. 8).

xiv. 2ib (Ex. xxiii. I9b; xxxiv. 26b); See further Oxford Hex. i. 73 f.

xvi.

igb

Examples:
xxii.

xvi.
;

9-15 (Ex.

xxiii.

16; xxxiv. 22); xvii. 2-7

19/20) xxiii. 19/20 f. (Ex. xxii. 24/25). \ Deu. xv. 1 2-1 8 is a reproduction of Ex. xxi. 2-6, the object of which at first sight seems to be the inculcation of generosity

(Ex.

toward released slaves; but the careful reader will notice that, according to Ex. xxi. 6, the ceremony prescribed is to take place at a sanctuary, while, according to Deu. xv. 7, the door at which the slave's ear is to be pierced is that of his master's dwelling in other
;

words, that the latter ignores the local sanctuaries recognized by the former. The hostility of the Deuteronomist to these old sanctuaries is still more apparent in xvi. 1-17, but especially in xix.
last

Comp. Ex. xxiii. 14-18; xxxiv. 18, 22 f. ; xxi. 12-14. In the passage I3b has been changed to prepare the reader for the Deuteronomic form of the law. See v. 14 and I Kgs. ii. 28. Thus, in one form or another, almost all the statutes of Ex. xxi.1-13.

xxiiS.,

except those relating to damages, xxi. i8-xxii. 14/13, reapSee Driver, ILOT, 73 ff. also Oxford pear in Deuteronomy. Hex. i. 75 f. The following are some of them: i. 8 (Gen. xv. 18); iv. 3. (Num. xxv. 3); vi. 16 (Ex. xvii. 7); vii. 20 (Ex. xxiii. 28); viii. 3 (Ex.
;

xvi. 15);

viii.

15

(Num.

xxi. 6;

Ex.

xvii. 6); ix.

22

(Num.

xi. 3,

34)

;

52

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

but more clearly in the extended passages in which cerIn these last the tain series of events are reviewed.*
order of the events mentioned, as well as the phraseology
is proof of dependence upon the parallel passages, partly Yahwistic and partly Elohistic, in the books of Exodus and Numbers.!

of the references to them,

The dependence

of

D

upon J and E, and therefore the

priority of the last two to the first, is universally admitted. There is also general agreement to the effect that both

and E, in some form, are as early as, if not earlier than, the earliest of the prophets whose works have been preserved this conclusion being based, not so much on unJ
;

mistakable references to these documents,^ as upon the relation of the ideas of their authors to those of Amos

and his immediate successors. The relative date of J and E, on the other hand, is a question on which scholars are still divided. Dillmann and others, as has already been
.

but the majority mainstated, hold to the priority of ; tain that J is the earlier, and this, on the whole, is the more defensible position. In its favor is the fact that, in
cases like Gen. xx. and xxvi. 7-11, in which the
xi.

E

same
;

xxiv.

6 (Num. 9 (Num. *

xvi.

i,

32)

xii.

; 4 (Ex. 4) ; 10); xxv. 17 (Ex. xvii. 8

xiii.

xiii.

xxiii.
ff.).

4 (Num.
f.
;

xxii. 5)

Compare

especially

i.

19-45 with
ix.

Num.

xiii.

ii.

8b-iii. 7

with
\

Num.
For a

xxi.

nb~35; and
discussion

fuller

9~x. 10 with Ex. xxxii.-xxxiv. of this subject, see Oxford Hex.

i.

70

ff.

{ Kittel

ings of

(HH, 82) cites the following passages from the writAmos and Hosea as proof that these prophets were aci.
:

quainted with both J and E Am. (Num. xiii. 27 ff., JE); ii. 10 [Gen.
25, J);
xii.

i.

u
xii.

(Gen. xxvii. 40, JE);

ii.

9

xlviii. 22,
;

E]

;

iv.

u

(Gen. xix.

Hos.

ix.

10

(Num. xxv.
ff.,

3,
ff,

E)

4/3b, 5/4 (Gen. xxxii. 25

J); xii.

4/3a (Gen. xxv. 26a, E); 13/12 (Gen. xxxi. 41, E;
10,

xxvii. 43,

JE; xxix. 18
123.

E)

;

xii.

14/13 [Deu. xxxiv.
Kittel,

E]

:

comp.

Driver,

ILOT,

See Dillmann,

NDJ,

628

ff.:

HH,

i.

76.

THE PENTATEUCH
and more
that J in

53

story appears in different versions, J original than the other.
its

is

A further
is

generally simpler indication

primitive form

is

the earlier

found

in the

na'ivett of the author's conceptions of

God and

his rela-

tions with men, as

compared with those

of the Elohistic

Thirdly, the code of Ex. xxi.-xxiii., which and probably originally came furnished the basis of toward the end of E's account of the Exodus, marks a
narrator.*

D

stage of progress in the production of a history of the Hebrews beyond that which had been reached when the

Yahwistic document was written, f Finally, when these documents are examined separately with reference to their age, the evidence, as will presently appear, seems
to

make

it

necessary to conclude that J antedates

E

by

at least half a century. J is earlier than E, but J dates from a period considerIt furnished parts of the ably later than that of Moses.

xxxiv.

account of the death and burial of the law-giver in Deu. In Gen. xxxvi. 31 a list of the early kings of

that reigned in the land of Edom before a king of the children of Israel ruled," sc. over that country. It is plain that these words could not
:

words

Edom, probably taken from " These are the kings

it,J

is

introduced by the

have been written before the reign of David
* The doctrine,

(2

Sam.

viii.

common

to

E
is

was unknown
also,

until the

Exodus,

with P, that the name Yahiueh unmistakable evidence of a com-

paratively advanced stage of theological development.
;

Compare,
;

Gen. xxi. 17 f. with xvi. 7 f. xxii. 11 f. with xviii. 13 f. xxxi. 7-9 with xxx. 41 if. etc. f Cornill (EAT, 37) compares the terms of the covenant in Ex.
;

xxxiv.

(J)

with the ten

commandments

parallels, the Elohistic analogue, as JBL, xii. 29 f.), being found in the

Bacon has shown (TTE,

in xx. (E); but they are not r 12 f. ;

in xx. 22-26, xxii.

fragments of another covenant 28/29-30/31, and xxiii. 10-33. \ See Wellhausen, CH, 52; Bacon, GG, 184; etc.

54
14).

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
Gen.

ix. 25, xil 6, and xiii. 7 are supposed to indisomewhat later date, since the Canaanites, etc., were not subdued until the reign of Solomon (i Kgs. ix. 20 f.). These passages alone would hardly be a sufficient

cate a

foundation for a statement concerning the date of the work in question but there is further evidence. The
;

fact,

recognized by scholars of the most divergent views on other points, that the document was one of the sources,

not only of the Pentateuch, but al'so of the book of Joshua,* if not of Judges, Samuel, and Kings,f proves that it cannot have been written before the Conquest ;
x.

and the further circumstance that the author of it in Jos. " " a work to which 1 3 quotes from the Book of Jashar for and lament Saul David's Jonathan (2 Sam. belonged
i.

and, according to the Septuagint (i Kgs. viii. a tetrastich 53j), by Solomon on the occasion of the dediindicates that it originated some cation of the temple,
1

8

ff.)

time after the beginning of the regal period. Nor is this This document, as well as E, expressly prohibits the all. use of symbols for the Deity (Ex. xxxiv. 17). If, however,

such a prohibition was promulgated by Moses,

is it

* The intimate relation of Joshua to the Pentateuch was first observed by Geddes (HB, i. xxi.). For characteristic passages from J, see xv. 14-19 and xvii. 14-18. f Bleek (Beitrdge\ as has already been noted, was the first (1822) to clearly define the connection between Joshua and the Pentateuch.

Later Stahelin (KU> 1843) applied the Supplementary Hypothesis to the other three books, and concluded that his Jehovist was the author, not only of the Hexateuch, but of the greater Schrader (in See also T, 93. part of Judges and i Samuel. de Wette's Einleitung, 359) asserts that the hand of the Yahwist " (his Prophetic Narrator ") can be traced as far as i Kgs. x. Budde (RS) makes J one of the sources of Judges and Samuel, and Cornill formerly held that it entered into the composition even of i Kings. The latter, however, has abandoned this position (EA T, 93 f., 106). J See Klostermann on i Kgs. viii. 12 f.

EA

THE PENTATEUCH

55

not strange that not only Micah and the Danites, in the unsettled period of the Judges, when "every man did " that which was right in his own eyes (Jud. xvii. 5 f., 13
xviii. 5, 31),

;

ephod
teraphim
xix.

but David, the chosen of Yahweh, used the and an image of some sort, and not a garment
in their
xxi.

approaches to
xxiii. 6,
ff.
;

God unrebuked
?

(i

Sam.

9 13 ; 9; f.) case of Gideon (Jud. viil 2/aa).* These early records are best explained by supposing that the use of images was not absolutely prohibited until after the revolt of the
northern tribes and the establishment of the sanctuary with a golden calf at Bethel (i Kgs. xii. 28). There is
therefore good ground for believing, with most scholars, that the Yahwistic document was written toward the

xxx. 7

See

also the

middle of the ninth century B. c. The evident partiality of its author for the tribe and kingdom of Judah indicates
that
it

had

its

origin in southern Palestine.!

E, on the other hand, was probably written in northern Palestine. At any rate, the author seems to have been
particularly interested in the persons and places that would naturally appeal to a native of that region. \ Its
*

The

rest of this verse is

an addition to the text much later than
:

the original story. See Moore, /. /. f Instances of such partiality are

the association of

Abraham

especially with Hebron (Gen. xiii. 18; xviii. i); the prominence given to Judah in the story of Joseph (Gen. xxxvii. 26; xliii. 3 ff. ; xliv. 1 8 ff.), and to his descendants in the blessing of Jacob (Gen.
xlix. 8
ff.) and the account of the conquest of Palestine (Jud. i. i ff.) and the fulness of the treatment of the reign of David (2 Sam.).
;

Compare Kuenen, OCH, 248 ff., who holds that J in its original form was a product of the fuller literary and spiritual life of the northern kingdom. J It is he who describes at length the rise of Joseph to power in Egypt (Gen. xl. f.), and foretells the greatness of his posterity (Deu. xxxiii. 13 ff.) who makes Reuben, rather than Judah, the spokes;

man among

his brethren (Gen.

xxxvii.

22

;

xlii.

22,

37)

;

who

56

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

to

general features, as has already been shown, are such as make the impression that it is later than J. It is not
surprising, therefore, to meet indications of its real age in the Pentateuch * also to discover that it was a more
;

extensive work than was at
it

was a principal source
If,

of Joshua, f

first suspected, that, in fact, in the compilation of the book however, it is later than J and earlier

than D, it seems safe to conclude that it was written about the beginning of the eighth century B. c., when, moreover, the conditions in Israel were peculiarly favorable to
its

production.

step in the compilation of the Pentateuch was the union of J and E into a single work. This, however, was not taken until both documents had undergone considerable changes in the way of enlargement and modification at the

The first

hand

of

more

or less sympathetic revisers.

The

proof of this assertion is found in the slighter variations in style and content of certain passages from the

body

of the

document

in

which they are now found

incor-

notices the position and achievements of Joshua (Ex. xvii. 9 ff. ; xxxiii. 1 1 ; Deu. xxxi. 14) ; and who oftenest mentions the shrines

dear to Israel, 17 f. xxxv. I
;

Shechem (Gen.
ff.),

xxxiii. i8b), Bethel

(Gen. xxviii.
19; xlvi.

and Beersheba (Gen.

xxi. 31

;

xxii.

2-sa).

" * The phrase "land of the Hebrews in Gen. xl. have been used before the occupation of Palestine
to the "

1

5

could hardly

;

the reference

Book

of the

Wars

of
;

the Conquest was long past
in
its

Yahweh," Num. xxi. 14, Implies that while the use of the term " prophet"

Gen. xx.

7, if

I

Sam.

ix.

9 has any value, forbids one to place
is

date earlier than the tenth century B. c. f The most important extract from E in this book

chapter

Elohist, as well as the Yahwist, has been supposed to have contributed to the composition of the later histories, espexxiv.
cially

The

Judges and Samuel but in this, as in the other case, the evidence adduced has not proven satisfactory. See the authorities quoted with reference to the extent of the Yahwistic document.
;

THE PENTATEUCH
porated.

57

document,

These additions were not, in the case of either all made at the same time. The older, which
;

some regard as excerpts from independent narratives, are 2 2 the later, by J 8 or E 8, etc.* designated by J or E The date of the union of J and E into the whole usually designated

There

is little

by JE must be fixed with reference to D. doubt that the first two were still separate

original of the last was written, for throughout gives evidence that, although its author was acquainted with both, he followed almost exclusively the later.f On the other hand, there is evidence that, when this docu-

when the

D

ment was revised and enlarged, the other two had already
been united for the author (or authors) of the additions which the plural of the second person is habitually used follows neither J nor E, but a compilation such as has been preserved in the Pentateuch. J If, therefore, as has been shown, the book found by Hilkiah was D in its revised and enlarged form, and it had its origin before
;

in

Among the passages referred to J are Gen. iv. 3-1 6a, and the fragments of the Yahwistic account of the Flood preserved in Gen. vi.-viii. among those credited to E 2, the story of the golden calf in Ex. xxxii. 1-6 and 15-24, and Num. xi. 16 f. and 240-30.
;

*

2

See
f

Cornill,

EA T, 39
D

ff.,

43

f.

distinct trace of the influence of J is seen in the repeated references in to the promise to the fathers. See vi. 10, etc. (Gen.

A

xxiv. 7

An exception to the rule above stated is the law concerning the annual feasts, Deu. xvi. 1-17, which seems to beSee Ex. xiii. 4 xxxiv. 22 f., 25. tray dependence on J.
;

etc.).

;

See the story of the spies, Deu. i. 19-45, where w. 24 f., 27, and 40-43 recall the parts of Num. xiii. f. (xiii. 23 f., 29; xiv. 250, 39b~4o) usually ascribed to E, while w. 28-30, 32 f., 35 f. and 39
J
(xiii. 28; xiv. 9b, 14; composite narrative also Deu. ix. 9-x. 5 and the parallel passages in Ex. xxxii. (9 f. [JE], 15 [E], 19 [E], 20 [E], 11-14 [JE] ) and xxxiv. (1-4 [J]). Compare Ox-

reflect the

Yahwistic or editorial features

xiii.

30

;

xiv. 24, 3, 31) of the

;

ford Hex.

i.

1

73

f.

58

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
;

Josiah began to reign, it follows that the compilation JE also must antedate 639 B. c. but how much earlier it was made, there seems to be no means of determining.

The next
form.

the insertion into

step in the production of the Pentateuch was in its revised and enlarged JE of

D

This would naturally follow soon after its publication yet it is doubtful if it was accomplished much, if any, before the overthrow of the Jewish monarchy. The work was probably done by a second redactor, who made such changes and additions as seemed to him
;

It is supposed to it to his purpose.* have been inserted into the place formerly occupied by Ex. xxi.-xxiii., the latter being removed to its present position in the account of the sojourn at Sinai to make room for it. At the same time most of the Deuteronomic touches in Genesis, Exodus, and Numbers were added f and the book of Joshua recast to furnish a

necessary to adapt

proper conclusion to the resulting Hexateuch.J The date of the Priestly document also, as has been
intimated,
is

in dispute

;

one party holding that

it

is

one

of the oldest, the other as stoutly maintaining that it is the latest, of the sources from which the Pentateuch was
tain

The former opinion is largely based on cerpassages in Deuteronomy which are supposed to betray an acquaintance with P but it will be found upon
compiled.
;

* One cannot otherwise explain the divergences that occur, especially in the first and the last chapters of the present book, where the plural is employed. Some of these passages, however,
are doubtless of
f
still

later origin.

the Deuteronomic element in these books, see p. 23. was united with \ Compare Kittel (HH, i. 75 .), who holds that J and E when the last two were united with each other, and that the compiler of this threefold work was the author of the additions

On

D

to

Deuteronomy and Joshua. Dillmann (NDJ, 677 ff.), on the other hand, claims that the third document was not D, but P.

THE PENTATEUCH

59

investigation that the passages usually cited, if they belong to the original document, have not the significance attributed to them, and if they really indicate

dependence upon

P,

they are later additions to the work.*

majority of critical scholars, therefore, regard P as a This view is product of Exilic and post-Exilic times.

The

In the first place, supported by a variety of evidence. a comparison of P with J, E, and D shows that it was
written by a person (or persons) acquainted with them ; that, in fact, it is the final product of a process of devel-

which they mark the previous stages. Its by its general features, the It appears maturity displayed in its plan and its ideas.

opment

of

relative lateness is attested

also in a multitude of particulars, especially the legislative and D. Take, e. g., the law parallels between it and It is first found, doubtless in its original of asylum. form, in Ex. xxi. 12 ff., where it takes but three verses.

E

repeated with additions in Num. xxxv. 9 ff., and again in Deu. xix. I ff. but the extent and character of the additions in the former of the last two passages show
It is
;

that the order of their origin has been reversed, that the

the

one in Numbers, and not the one in Deuteronomy, final form of the law in question.

is

The
ments

result of the
is

comparison of P with the other docuconfirmed from other directions first by the
;

silence of the history of the pre-Exilic period with reference to it and its peculiar features. The tabernacle, f * Thus, the three passages most frequently cited, i. 23, xiv. 4 ff., and xxiv. 8, are all either wholly or partly of a secondary character. Moreover, i. 23 was not derived from Num. xiii. 2-15, as is shown by the omission of Joshua from v. 36 xiv. 4 ff. is an un-Deuteronomic interpolation; and xxiv. 8 betrays a sacerdotal origin or
;

expansion. t In i Sam.

ii. 22 the latter part of the verse is an interpolation not found in the Greek Version; and in i Kgs. viii. 4 the tent in

60

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
seem
to

the high priest, the day of atonement, and other like
objects and institutions

have been unknown

during this whole period.* The testimony of the preExilic prophets is even stronger; for they express themselves respecting the matters with which this document is most concerned in such terms as prove that,

although the movement which produced it was already under way, the document itself had not, yet made its

Thus, Amos (v. 21 ff.) and Isaiah (i. 10 ff.) both disparage feasts and offerings as they would not have done had P already been recognized as the law of
appearance.

Jeremiah, himself a priest as well as a prophet, says expressly (vii. 22) that God gave the fathers, when
;

God and

he delivered them from Egypt, no command concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices. The last passage is doubtless to be interpreted in the light of Jer. viii. 8, where the prophet accuses the scribes of his time of deal-

The two seem to ing falsely with the law of Yahweh. show that, when Jeremiah wrote, laws such as now constitute a large part of the priestly document were in process of codification, but that the prophet, at any rate, did

not regard them as of divine, or even Mosaic origin. The testimony of Ezekiel is to the same effect. His
prophecies,
of P,

when examined
that, while there

in the light of the contents

is an element in the latter which apparently antedates the former, there are parts of the document which betray the dependence of their author (or authors) upon Ezekiel, and that, therefore, the document as a whole must be referred to a period
is the tent provided for the ark by David, and not, as " " the tent of meeting described in Exodus.
ff.,

show

question
is called,

it

OTJC, 254
133
ff-

* See Wellhausen, GI, 40 ff.; comp. Green,

153

ff.,

112

ff.;

W.

R. Smith,
(French),

MP,

85

ff.;

Lex Mosaica

THE PENTATEUCH

61

subsequent to that in which the prophet labored.* Hagi.-viii. and Malachi, gai, also, and the authors of Zch.

seem to ignore
fifth

it

;

which indicates that

it

was unknown

in Palestine until

some time
is

after the beginning of the

century

B.

c.f

The terminus ad quern
determined.
Ezra,

more

easily

and

satisfactorily

"a

In the year 458 B. c., according to Ezr. vii., ready scribe in the law of' Moses," came from

Babylon to Jerusalem "to teach in Israel statutes and judgments." At first his countrymen received him with favor, even with enthusiasm, but their ardor seems to have been .short-lived. At any rate, it was fourteen years before, with the assistance of Nehemiah, he persuaded them to recognize the divine authority of the law that he had brought with him. Finally, however, in 444 " he accomplished his purpose, and " the law of Moses became the code of the restored community. But this law, according to Neh. viii. 14, contained, among other
things, the instructions concerning the celebration of the

* The
of

relative

age of Ezekiel and the above-mentioned elements

indicated by their respective views on the subject of the In Lev. xvii.-xxvi. and the other passages priests and the Levites. of like character no distinction between priests and Levites, unless
is

P

Ezekiel first makes such a dishas been interpolated, appears. In the body of P the tinction (xliv.) ; but he has no high priest. priesthood is the exclusive possession of the sons of Aaron (Num.
it

xviii.

i ff.), with Aaron himself, and his eldest son after him, in a xx. 22 ff.). See Wellprincely position at their head (Num. xvii.
;

hausen, GI, 126

ff.;

Kuenen,
i.

OCH,
f.
;

293

ff.;

374

f.

;

Oxford Hex.

127

comp. Green,

W. R. Smith, OTJC, MP, 127 ff Lex
. ;

Mosaica (Spencer), 510
j-

ff.

Kuenen (OCH, 179

as

it

xxii.

ff.) agrees with the above statement so far concerns Haggai and Zechariah, but he finds references to Lev. 20 ff. and Num. xviii. 21 ff. in Mai. i. 8 and iii. 10. See also

Holzinger,

EH,

428

;

comp.

Cornill,

EA T,

52

f.

;

Nowack, on

Mai.

iii.

22/iv. 4.

62

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

feast of tabernacles
it

found in Lev. xxiii. 39 ff. ;* hence must either have been, or contained,, some form of P. In either case this document cannot be later than the

date just mentioned. It is difficult to decide whether the law promulgated by Ezra and Nehemiah was P alone or the completed

In favor of the former view is its harmony Pentateuch. with the accepted theory with reference to the history of It seems natural that this document, like the other, D. should have become a part of the growing compilation
authoritative.

only after having been solemnly recognized as divinely Moreover, there seems to be a discrepancy between the law of Ex. xxx. 1 1 ff. and the rule which, according to Neh. x. 32, was adopted by the restored

community. It is objected, however, that, if the law in question had been P, the account of the conquest of Canaan preserved in the book of Joshua, with which it originally ended, would not afterward have been detached from it, as it has been, and classed with the less sacred books that follow it.f Moreover, some of the requirements of Neh. x. 28 ff. betray regard for J or D rather than for P, J and the author (or authors) of the Chronicles, of which the books of Ezra and Nehemiah were originally
parts, throughout takes for granted the identity of the law of Moses with the Pentateuch. Hence, it seems

safest to conclude that,

Neh. viii. the book

I

ff.,

of

any foundation for incorporated with JED, and Joshua detached from the resulting Hexaif

there

is

P had been

* See also

x.
;

(Num.
xv. 20
t

iii.
;

5

ff.

Lev.

34/33 (Lev. xxiv. 5 ff. Num. vi. 12 f.), 36/35 (Lev. xix. 23
;

xxviii.
.),

.), 35/34 38/37 (Num.

f. xviii. 24), 39/38 (Num. xviii. 25 ff.). See Wellhausen, IJG, 136. j See Neh. x. 31/30 (Ex. xxxiv. 16; Deu. vii. 3), 32/31 (Ex. xxiii. 10 f. Deu. xv. i f.); note, also the Deuteronomic phrase;

ology of

v. 30/29.

THE PENTATEUCH
;

63

* in other teuch, before 458, or, at the latest, 444 words, that it was the Pentateuch in its fourfold composition to

which the Jews in their assembly pledged obedience, the occasional passages betraying a later date being interpolations by more or less competent readers or copyists.
i. 138 ff.f conclusion reached with respect to the age of the Pentateuch, then, is, that J originated about 850, and E about 800 B. c. ; that the two, having been more or less

Comp. Oxford Hex.

The

revised and enlarged, were united into a composite document before 639 B. c. that D, which was discovered
;

but must have been written some time before and revised in the reign of Manasseh, was incorpoin

621

B. c.,

rated with JE early in the Captivity and that the Pentateuch was practically completed by the addition of P, a product of the first half of the fifth century B. c., before 444, if not before 458, the date of Ezra's appearance in
;

Palestine.:):

*
1

According to Kosters (HIPT), who removes Neh.

vii. 6-viii.

8 to the end of the book, the promulgation of the Law did not take place until Nehemiah's second visit to Jerusalem about 432

Comp. Torrey, EN, 2 ., 49 f. In reply to the objection (Holzinger, EH, 430 f.) that, if the book had been the Pentateuch, the reader would not have reached Lev. xxiii. on the second day (Neh. viii. 13 f.), one might retort that, if it had been P, the reading of it would not have required
B. c.

f

ten days (Neh. ix. 3). One might add that there is nothing in the account of the matter to make it necessary to insist that the book
in question

was read

in course.

\ It has sometimes been pronounced "a thing incredible" that the Pentateuch should be such a patchwork as the documentary

hypothesis makes it. Fortunately there are other examples of compilation, one of which is quite as elaborate as this is supposed " to be. It is the Diatessaron," or fourfold Gospel, of Tatian, which at one time had nearly supplanted the originals in the Syrian Church.

The

following

is

a specimen quoted from the Arabic

64

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

The dates given, it will be observed, are the dates when the documents as such are believed to have originated, and when the Pentateuch as a compilation reached the various stages in its development. They do not, except in the cases in which the later documents can be shown to reproduce the earlier, indicate the age of the
materials of which the documents are composed. These materials, in the case of J and E, were probably to some

extent derived from oral tradition

;

but there

is

good

evidence that the authors of these two works, as well as and P, had written sources at their disposal. those of

D

In certain instances they confess their indebtedness to
it by Professor Moore (JBL, ix. 207 ff.). The three kinds of type indicate the three sources, Mark, Luke, and Matthew, from which it was compiled " And the same day, when even was come, he said unto

version of

:

them, Let us go unto the other side of the lake. And when they had sent away the multitude [Jesus] went into a ship with his disciples and there were also with him other little ships. And behold there arose a great tempest in the sea, and the ships were near being swamped by the waves and [Jesus] was in the stern asleep on a pillow. And his disciples came to him and awoke Then he arose and rehint) saying, Master, save us, we perish f buked the wind and the raging of the water, and said unto the and the wind ceased, and there was a sea, Peace, be still great calm. And he said unto them, Why are ye so fearful ? How is it that ye have no faith ? And they feared exceedingly [and] wondered, saying one to another, What manner of man is this ? for he commandeth even the winds and water, and they " obey him (Mar. iv. 35a Lu. viii. 22b Mar. iv. 36a Lu. viii. 22a Mar. iv. 36b Mat. viii. 24a Lu. viii. 23b Mar. iv. 38a Mat. viii. 25; Lu. viii. 24b; Mar. iv. 39^41 a; Lu. viii. 25b). This passage consists of twelve fragments, only two of which contain a whole verse. There is probably in the Pentateuch no passage in which the critics would claim that the supposed editor (or editors) treated his documents with greater freedom. For other examples of compilation, see Oxford Hex. i. 4 ff.
;

;

!

;

;

;

;

;

;

;

;

THE PENTATEUCH
such sources.
the covenant
it

65

Thus, although they

differ

on the form of

made

at Sinai-Horeb,

they agree in repre-

document the contents of which senting also quote from various naboth They they reproduce. In one instance (Num. xxi. 14), it will be tional songs. " Book remembered, the Elohist names the source, the of the Wars of Yahweh," from which the lines quoted are taken. The Yahwist does not inform the reader where he found the poetical extracts in the earlier parts of his narrative but the fact that, later in the work, he " cites the "Book of Jasher (Jos. x. 13) seems to waras a written
;

rant one in supposing that the earlier quotations are from the same or some other written source. The words of the covenant, according to J (Ex. xxxiv. 28), were put
into
xxiv. 3),

writing by Moses so, also, according to E (Ex. the judgments revealed to the lawgiver at Ho;

reb.*

Now

it

is

not possible to apply these statements

to the covenant

and the judgments in the form in which in Exodus xxxiv. 10-26 and xx. 22-xxiii. 33 f appear they but, since there can be no doubt that Moses was the actual founder of the Hebrew church and commonwealth, it is safe to assume that he gave his people in writing the simpler precepts and^ regulations from which were developed, first the legislation ascribed to him in J and E, and He may finally the more elaborate codes of D and P. also, as Ex. xvii. 14 has been supposed to teach that he did, have made a record of the leading incidents of the
;

* Deu. xxvii. 8, if it belongs to E (Bacon), also refers to these judgments and implies that they had been put into writing by Moses.
f The principal reasons for this statement are, that these passages are not homogeneous wholes, and that they contain elements clearly of a later date than that of the Exodus. See Driver, ILOT,

35
tel,

f.,

39

f.

;

Cornill,

EA T, 66

ff.

;

W.

R. Smith, OTJC, 337

ff.

;

Kit-

HH,

i.

235

f.

66
;

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

Exodus but it is quite as probable that the memory of them was preserved in popular songs like that of Ex. xv. " and those collected in the " Book of Jasher and the " Book of the Wars of Yahweh." As the ideas and principles taught by Moses were developed, it was natural
that the resulting codes, one after another, should be called by his name and, when they were all finally in;

corporated into a history of the period which closed with the Exodus, that he should be credited with writing this great work as well as performing the great deeds which
it

especially

commemorates.*
then, of the investigation undertaken
is,

The outcome,

that, although tributed to Moses,

in parts of the Bible the

Pentateuch is atand such was for centuries the teach-

ing of the Christian as well as the Jewish church, the doctrine is based upon a mistaken tradition the truth
;

" being that this so-called law of Moses is a composite work, the growth of the entire period from Moses to Ezra This conclusion, being based upon the best of

"

evidence, will have to be accepted, however it may affect the authority of the Pentateuch or the renown of its supish either.

posed author. As a matter of fact it ought not to diminIn the church of S. Pietro in Vincoli at Rome is the famous statue of the Hebrew lawgiver. It is a magnificent work of art, and at first one is glad that it is placed where its minutest details can conveniently be examined.

Soon, however, the spectator with some artistic judgment begins to be disturbed in his enjoyment. There seems to be something wrong about the masterpiece. Its

grandeur

is

so obtrusive that

it

becomes oppressive.

He

turns to his guidebook and there finds an explanation for the effect produced upon him. The statue, it appears,

W.

* For further illustrations of the process here described, see R. Smith, OTJC, 383 ff.

THE PENTATEUCH

67

was not made for the place which it now occupies, but was to have formed part of a colossal monument in the
largest of the world's cathedrals.

Suppose, now, that

some great artist should carry out the original plan of Michael Angel o, complete the memorial to Julius II., and
add
it

to the attractions of S. Pietro in Vaticano.

Would

any one with any taste probably object to such a consummation ? One might at first miss the sharpness of outline which now forces itself upon the beholder, and feel
a
little

the design for the mausoleum
greatest of

confused by the thirty other statues belonging to but the genius of the
;

modern
artist

sculptors

is

a guarantee that in the

work would receive increased What might be done for the Moses of art admiration. the biblical scholars of the last half century have done for the Moses of history. They have deprived him, inof the lesser honor of deed, having written a great work at the dictation of the 'Deity but, in associating with him the succession of writers by whom the Pentateuch was actually composed and compiled, they have given him the preeminence, as the inspired founder of a nation and
end both the
and
his
;

its religion, for which his God designed him. Moreover, those whose eyes are open to "behold wondrous things" out of the Scriptures say of the process now revealed, as devoutly as they ever did of the one by which they for-

merly believed the Pentateuch to have been produced,
This
is

from Yahweh,
marvellous in our eyes.

And

it is

ANALYSIS OF GENESIS
THE Documentary
tateuch.

I.-XI.

Hypothesis

is

based on known facts

with reference to the structure and content of the PenIt ought, therefore, to explain them. It does the mass of them to most of those explain great competent to decide in such matters, and this is the reason for

Its most ardent adprevalence in the scholarly world. would hardly claim that it is absolutely He would doubtless admit that, at this distance perfect.
its

vocate, however,

from the period of the origin of the Pentateuch, it is too much to expect to be able to unravel to the last thread the history of its compilation, and that, therefore, one must not be surprised if the accepted theory is not applicable without exceptions.

The limitations confessed, as well as the merits of the hypothesis, are fairly illustrated in the first eleven chapters of Genesis. The composite character of these chapters has been established. See pp. 16 ff. The separation
of the Priestly
is

from the other elements therein contained
first

account of creation (i. i-ii. 3) is plainly easy. of this character. It is equally clear that this account

The

was

v. 29),

originally immediately followed by chapter v. (except and that by an account of the Flood which seems
vi.

to have been preserved entire in
i6a,

9-22

;

vii. 6,

n, 13-

28

f.

18-21, 24; viii. i-2a, 3b~5, I3a, 14-19; ix. 1-17, The fourth chapter of this work is found distrib-

uted through the tenth of the canonical Genesis (vv. la, the fifth, as a continuous 2-43, 5-7, 20, 22 f., 31 f.)
;

whole, in

xi.

10-26

;

and the

sixth, or a part of

it,

in

xi.

ANALYSIS OF GENESIS

I. -XI.

69

27 and 31 f. These passages, when read continuously, produce the impression that they were written, substantially as they have been preserved, for one another and

by the same hand. When they have been removed, there remains a
of

series

Yahwistic passages the discrepancies among which

make
or

it necessary to pronounce them the product of two more authors, but do not make it possible in every case to determine by which of the supposed authors a It is pretty generally agreed given passage was written.

that the following passages belong to J 1, the earliest stratum of the Yahwistic component of the Pentateuch
:

iv.

There is 1-9. similar unanimity in referring the story of the Flood interwoven with that of the Priestly narrator in vi. 5~ix.
160-24
;

vi.

I

f.,

4

;

ix.

20-27

;

and

xi.

19,

and the Yahwistic table
;

of nations in chapter
xi.

x.,

in

their original form, to J 2

also

28-30.

There remain

two extended passages, ii. 4b-iii. 24, in its original form, and iv. 2-i6a, the former of which has hitherto generally been attributed to J 1 the latter to a third author, per2 1 haps the compiler who put J and J together. This is
,

the view adopted in the following pages but Holzinger 1 (Genesis, xxv.), e.g., treats both as excerpts from J while
;
,

The discrepanKautzsch (LOT, 226) refers them to J 2 1 cies among the passages which Holzinger assigns to J which must have ocsuggest to him the question, curred to others, and certainly deserves consideration, " whether it would not be more correct to suppose that the main stream of the Yahwistic history of primitive times (J 2) has not been enriched by the incorporation of other (older) legends of very various origin, which had " never previously been brought into organic connection Stade (ZA W, 1894, 275 ff.) meets the (Genesis, 122). same difficulty by supposing the Yahwistic account of the

70

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

tion, consisting of J

Flood to have been incorporated into a previous compilaa (ii. 4a-iii. 24* and xi. 1-9) united with J b (iv. 25 f., 17 ff., and ix. 20 ff. perhaps also x. 9 and vi. I f.) by an editor who also inserted the story It will be (already long current) of Kayin and Hebhel.* observed that, although the authors cited differ in their analysis of the remains of the Yahwistic document socalled, they agree that there was such an independent work, and that it was a compilation. The extent and character of the additions made by its compiler and the one who afterwards incorporated it with P, also later On x. glossators, may be learned from the translation. 8-12, see the comments. The object of the foregoing analysis was to discover the sources of the chapters to be studied. If, now, they be examined with reference to their content, the result will be more satisfactory for, in spite of the fact that from various were documents, they poscompiled they sess a certain unity and unfold in accordance with an This plan is a modification of that of intelligible plan. the Priestly document, the author of which is one of the most logical of the writers whose works are pre;

;

An idea of the skill with served in the Old Testament. which the compiler managed the materials at his disposal may be gathered, in advance of a more thorough study of the chapters themselves, from the following
table of topics therein treated
I.
:

I.

The World before Abraham, i.-xi. The Origin of Things, i.-iii. a. The Work of God, i.-ii.

* From this point onward, proper names, except in quotations from other authors, will appear in forms indicating with approximating exactness their Hebrew pronunciation. For a key to the
transliteration, see the Preface.

ANALYSIS OF GENESIS
(1)
(a)

I.-XL

71

The First Account, i. i-ii. 3. The First Day, i. 1-5. (b) The Second Day, vv. 6-8. (c) The Third Day, vv. 9-13. (d) The Fourth Day, w. 14-20. (e) The Fifth Day, w. 21-23. (f) The Sixth Day, vv. 24-31. ii. 1-3. (g) The Seventh Day, ii. 4-25. (2) The Second Account, (a) The Formation of Man, vv. 4-7. (b) The Garden in 'Edhen, vv. 8-17. (c) The Advent of Woman, vv. 18-25. b. The Origin of Evil, iii. vv. 1-7. (1) The First Disobedience, (2) The Consequences of Disobedience, vv.
2.

8-21.

Expulsion from Paradise, vv. 22-24. Early Growth and Corruption, iv. i-vi. 8. a. The Line of Kayin, iv. 1-24.
(3) (1)

The

First Murder, vv. 1-16.

Rejected Offering, vv. 1-7. (b) The Offerer's Resentment, vv. 8-16. (2) The Earliest Civilization, vv. 17-24.
(a)

A

b.

The Line
(1)

of Sheth,

iv.

25~v. 32.
iv.

A

Genealogical Fragment,

25

f.

The Complete Geneaolgy, v. c. The Apostate Sons of God, vi. 1-8. 3. Noah and his Times, vi. 9-ix. 29. a. The Deluge, vi. 9~ix. 17. (1) The Preparations of Noah, vi. o/-vii. 5. (a) The First Account, vi. 9-22. (b) The Second Account, vii. 1-5. (2) The Water of the Flood, vii. 6-viii. 14.
(2) (a)

Gradual Subsidence, viii. 14. (3) The Future of the Survivors, viii. I5~ix. (a) Noah's Offering, viii. 1 5-22. (b) The Sacredness of Life, ix. 1-7. (c) God's Bow, vv. 8-17. b. Noah's Prophecy, vv. 18-29.
(b)
4.

A A

Destructive Prevalence,

vii.

6-24.

17.

The Origin

of the Peoples, x.-xi.

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
a.

The Race and
(1)

its

Divisions, x. i-xi.

9.

A

(a)

Gradual Dispersion, x. The Families of Yepheth, vv. 1-5.

The Families of Ham, w. 6-20. The Families of Shem, vv. 21-32. of Tongues, xi. 1-9. (2) The Confusion b. The Line of Shem, xi. 10-26. c. The Family of Terah, vv. 27-32.
(b)
(c)

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
I.

TRANSLATION

*

I,

a

'-

1

(i) (a)
2

earth.

Now the

IN the beginning God created heaven and earth was waste and void, and darkness
;

was on the face

of the deep but the spirit of God brooded over the face of the water. 3 Then God said, Let there be light and there was light 4 and God saw
;
;

was good. God also separated the light from the darkness and God called the light Day, while the darkness he called Night. 5 So it became evening, then became morning, one day.
that the light
;

6 Then God said, Let there be an expanse in the (b) middle of the water, that it may make a division in the water and f sof it f was.f 7 Thus God made the expanse,
;

and it J separated the water that was under the expanse from the water that was above the expanse. 8 God also
called the expanse

good].
9

So

it

Heaven [and God saw that it was became evening, then became morning, a
:

second day.
(c)

Then God
itself into

said,

Let the water under heaven
dry ground
^f

gather

one

mass,|| that

may
:

* The sources of the text are indicated by difference of type the being used for passages from P and additions betraying a similar style or standpoint, and the Antique for the Yahwistic elements. Omissions supplied are enclosed in brackets. the Massoretic text has this clause at the end of v. 7. f Gr.

Roman

;

Syr.
"lr.
;

;

text,

God.

Gr.

text, place.

^

Text, the dry ground.

74

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
;

[1.

9-22

[Thus the water under heaven its mass, and dry ground the God also called dry ground Land, and appeared].* the mass of water he called Sea and God saw that it was good. n Moreover, God said, Let the land put forth herb yielding seed [after its kind, and]f vegetation tree J bearing fruit, wherein is its seed, after its kind on the earth and so it was. 12 Thus the land put forth vegetation herb yielding seed after its kind, and tree bearing fruit, whose seed is in itself, after its kind and God saw that it was good. 13 So it became evening, then
appear

and so
itself

it

was.

10

gathered

together into

:

:

;

||

:

;

became morning, a third day. 14 Then God said, Let there be lights in the firma(d) ment of heaven to' distinguish between day and night. Let them also be signs, and for seasons, and for days and 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of heaven, years and so it was. 16 Thus God to shed light upon the earth
;
:

made the two

great lights the greater light to rule day, and the lesser light to rule night also the stars. 17 And God placed them in the expanse of heaven, to shed light
;

;

18 upon the earth, as well as to rule over day and over night, and to distinguish between -light and darkness and God saw that it was good. 19 So it became evening, then became morning, a fourth day. 2 Then God said, Let the water swarm with abun(e) dant living creatures, and let birds fly over the earth, across the expanse of heaven [and so it was].^[ 21 Thus God created the great monsters, and all the living, moving creatures with which the water swarms after their and God kinds, and every winged bird after its kind saw that it was good. God also blessed them, saying,
; ;
;

ffl

* Gr. Gr.

f
;

Gr.

J Text, fruit-tree.

the Massoretic text inserts this clause after/rw//. IT Gr. Text, caused to go forth.

I.

22-si]

TRANSLATION

75

sea

Increase and multiply, that ye may fill the water in the and let the birds multiply on the land. ** So it be;

came evening, then became morning, a fifth day. 2* Then God said, Let the land produce living (f)
tures after their kinds
26
;

crea-

and creeping things, and beasts of the earth, after their kinds and so it was.
cattle,
:

Thus God made the beasts

of the earth after their kind,

and the
of the

ground after their kind
*

good.

and all the creeping things and God saw that it was M Moreover, God said, Let us make men in our
cattle after their kind,
:

after our likeness, that they may exercise over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of lordship heaven, and over the cattle, and over all [the beasts of] f

image [and]

the earth, and over ^ Thus the earth.

all

the creeping things that creep on
;
:

God created men in his own image male and female in the image of God created he them created he them. w God also blessed them, and God said
to them, Increase

and multiply, that ye may fill the earth and subdue it, and exercise lordship over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of heaven, [and over the cattle], J and over all the beasts [of the earth, and over all the w God said creeping things], that creep on the earth. also, Lo, I give fo you every herb yielding seed that is on the face of the whole earth, and every tree in which ^ and is fruit ^y yielding seed yours shall it be for food to all the beasts of the earth, and to all the birds of ** heaven, and to all [the creeping things] creeping on the earth, in which is a living soul, [give I] every green herb 31 And when God beheld all for food; and so it was. So it became that he had made, lo, it was very good. evening, then became morning, a f f sixth day.
||
||

;

:

* Gr. Sam. Vul.
||

f Syr.

J Gr. Syr.
If

Gr.
tree.

Sam.;

text, all the trees.

Gr.;

text,/// of a

** Gr.

ft Text, the.

76
(g)

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
*

[II. 1-15

Thus heaven and
2

earth were finished, and

all

therefore God, on the seventh day, had put an end to the work that he had done, he rested on the seventh day from all the work that he had done.
their host.
3

When

God

cause on

also blessed the seventh day, and hallowed it, beit he rested from all the creative work that he,
4

God, had done.
(2) (a)

These are the generations

of

heaven and earth,

when they were created. At the time when Yahweh God made earth and heaven, 5 no shrub of the field was yet in the earth, and no herb of the field had yet sprung up for Yahweh God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there were no men to 6 But a mist rose from the earth, till the ground. Yahand watered the whole face of the ground. weh God also formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life. Thus man became a living creature. 8 Then Yahweh God planted a garden in 'Edhen, (b) eastward, and placed there the man that he had formed. 9 Yahweh God also caused to spring from the ground every tree pleasant to sight and good for food also the tree of life in the middle of the garden Now and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
;
"'

;

10

went forth from 'Edhen a river watering the garden and n The name of it branched and became four sources. the first is Pishon. It is the one that boundeth the whole land of Hawilah, where there is gold. 12 Moreover, the gold of that
there
;

thence

There is bdellium and the onyx. 18 And second river is Gihon. It is the one that boundeth the whole land of Kush. H And the name of the third river is Hiddekel. It is the one that floweth east of
land is [very] * good.
the

name

of the

'Asshur.

And

the fourth river

is

the Perath.

15

Yahweh God

*Sam.

II.

iS-III.

i]

TRANSLATION
man and
it.

77

also

to

till

took the and guard

placed him

in the garden of 'Edhen,

16

Moreover,
all

Yahweh God charged

the trees of the garden thou mayst eat, 17 except the tree of knowledge of good and evil: from it thou shalt not eat; for in the day thou eatest from it thou shalt surely die.

the man, saying,

From

Then said Yahweh God, It is not good for the man to be alone I will make him a helper suited to him. 19 Thereupon Yahweh God [further] * formed from the ground [all the cattle, and] all the beasts of the field, and all the birds of heaven, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them and whatsoever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 2 Thus the man gave names to all the cattle, and [all] f the birds of heaven, and all the beasts of the field but for himself the J man $ found not a helper suited to him. 21 Then Yahweh God let fall upon the man a stupor, and he fell asleep
18

(c)

;

;

;

;

whereupon he took one of his ribs, closing up its a And Yahweh God fashioned the place with flesh.
rib that

he had taken from the man into a woman, and brought her to the man. 23 Then said the man, This, now, is one of my bones and a part of my flesh she shall be called Woman, because from [her]

;

man

she

was
||

taken.

24

Therefore shall a

man

leave

and his mother and cleave to his wife, and the [two] become one flesh. 25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, yet they felt no shame. b (i) iiL1 Now the serpent was most cunning of all the beasts of the field that Yahweh God had made. [The serpent] therefore said to the woman,
his father
*[[

* Gr. Sam.
J Gr.
||

;

text,

a

man

or

'Adham.

f Gr. Syr. Vul. Gr. Sam.
1[

Gr. Syr. Vul.

Gr. Syr.

78

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
then, said,
2

[III. 1-14

Hath God,
of the

Ye

shall not eat

from any tree

said, From the the trees of the garden we may eat, 3 except that of the fruit of this t tree that is in the middle of the garden God hath said, Ye shall not eat from it, nor shall ye touch it, lest ye die. Then said the serpent to the woman, Ye will not surely die 6 for God knoweth that, in the day ye eat from

garden?

But the

woman

fruit of [all] *

'

;

your eyes will be opened and ye will be like God, knowing good and evil 'Now when the woman saw that the tree was good for food and a delight
it,

to the eyes, also that the tree

was desirable
:

to

make

she took from its fruit and ate she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate. 7 Thereupon the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked so they sewed together fig leaves and made themselves aprons. 8 But when they heard Yahweh God walking (2) in the garden in the cool of the day, the man and his wife hid themselves from the face of Yahweh God among the trees of the garden. 9 Yahweh God therefore called the man, saying to him, Where art thou ? 10 and he said, I heard thee in the garden and I became afraid, because I was naked, and hid myself. n But he said, Who told thee thou wast naked ? Hast thou eaten from the tree from which I commanded thee not to eat ? u And the man said, The woman thou placedst with me, she gave me from the tree, and I ate. 13 Thereupon Yahweh God said to the woman, What is this that thou hast done ? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I ate. Then said Yahweh God to the serpent, Because thou hast done this, cursed shalt thou be above

one

-wise,

;

'

'

* Gr. Syr.

-f

Sam.

;

text, the.

1 1 1.

14-24]

TRANSLA TION

79

all the cattle and all the other beasts of the field. On thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat, all the days of thy life. 15 1 will also set enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy offspring and her offspring; they shall bruise thee in the head, and thou shalt wound them in the heel 16 To the woman [also] * he said, I will send thee labor very sore, even thy pregnancy with labor shalt thou bear children. Moreover, toward thy husband shall be thy 17 But to the f longing, and he shall rule over thee. man I he said, Because thou hast listened to the voice of thy wife, and eaten from the tree concerning which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat from it, cursed shall be the ground on thy account with labor shalt thou eat from it all the days of thy life. Thorns also and thistles shall it put forth for 19 In thee, and thou shalt eat the herb of the field. the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread until thou
;

;

-

'

return to the ground for from it thou wast taken; for dust thou art and to dust thou shalt return. -" And
the

man

called the

name

of his wife

was

the mother of every one living.

21

Hawwah, because she But Yahweh God

man J and his wife tunics of skin and clothed them. -Then said Yahweh God, Lo, the man has become as (3) one of us, knowing good and evil and now, lest he stretch forth his hand and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and & then Yahweh God sent him from the live forever, garden of 'Edhen, to till the ground whence he was taken. M And when he had driven the man forth, he stationed eastward of the garden of 'Edhen cherubs and a gleammade for the
;

ing,

whirling sword, to guard the

way to

the tree of

life.

* Gr. Sam.

f

Gr

-

5

text>

'Adham.

J Gr.

;

text,

'Adham.

8o

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
iv

[IV. 1-15

JThen the man knew Hawwah his 2, a, (i) (a) conceived and bore Kayin. And she and she wife, a man I have with Yahweh. 2 Again, said, gained
she bore his brother Hebhel and Hebhel became a keeper of sheep, but Kayin became a tiller of the ground.
;

Thus it came to pass after a time, that Kayin brought from the produce of the ground an offering to Yahweh; 4 while
8

Hebhel brought from the firstlings of his flock, even from their And Yahweh had regard to Hebhel and his offering 6 but to Kayin and his offering he had not regard. Thereupon was Kayin very angry and downcast. 6 But Yahweh said to Kayin, Why art thou angry ? and why art thou downcast ?
fat.
;

If thou doest well, is there not acceptance? and, if thou doest not well, doth not sin lie at the door? Yet toward thee shall be its longing, and thou shalt rule over it.
7

Then Kayin said to Hebhel, [Let us go to the field];* came to pass that, when they were in the field, Kayin assailed Hebhel his brother and killed him. 9 But Yahweh said to Kayin, Where is Hebhel thy brother ? And he said, I know not. Am I my brother's keeper? 10 Then he said, What hast thou done? The voice of thy brother's blood
8

(b)

and

it

crieth to me from the ground. n Now, therefore, cursed shalt thou be from the ground, that hath opened its mouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy hand. 12 When thou tillest the ground, it shall no longer yield thee its wealth. A wanderer and a fugitive shalt thou be in the earth. 18 But Kayin said to Yahweh, My punishment is greater than I can

bear. 14 Lo, thou hast this day banished me from the face of the ground, and from thy face I must hide myself, becoming a wanderer and a fugitive in the earth so that it will come to
;

pass, that

whosoever meetet
if

me

will kill me.
kill

16

And Yah-

weh

said to him, Therefore

any one

avenged sevenfold.

So Yahweh

Kayin, he shall be appointed a sign for Kayin,

* Gr. Sam. Syr.

IV. 15-26]

TRANSLATION

81

whosoever met him should not kill him. 16 And Kayin went forth from the presence of Yahweh and dwelt in the land of Nodh, eastward of 'Edhen.
that

Then Kayin knew his wife, and she conceived and bore Hanokh. He * was * the builder of a city, which he called, after his son's name, Hanokh. 18 There was born to Hanokh also 'Iradh and 'Iradh begot Mehiyya'eljf and Mehiyya'el begot Methu19 Now sha'el; and Methusha'el begot Lemekh. Lemekh took to himself two wives the name of the one was 'Adhah, and the name of the second Sillah.
17

(2)

;

:

20

And'Adhah bore Yabhal: he was

the father of

21 And [every] one that dwelleth in tents with cattle. the name of his brother was Yubhal he was the
:

father of every one that handleth the lyre
22
:

and the

Sillah, also, bore Tubhal Kayin he J was J pipe. the J father J of J every one that worketh copper. And the sister of Tubhal Kayin was Na'amah. 23 And

Lemekh

said to his wives 'Adhah and Sillah, hear my voice Wives of Lemekh, give ear to my speech For a man I slay, if I am wounded, And a boy for a wale given me. 24 If Kayin was avenged sevenfold, Then shall Lemekh be seventy and seven times. b (i) a Then the man knew his wife again, [and she conceived] and bore a son, and she called his
: : :
||

name

Sheth, saying,

God hath

sent

me

other offspring

instead of Hebhel, since Kayin hath killed him.

K To Sheth, was born he called his name a and 'Bnosh. also, son, He ^f was ^f the ^f first ^f to call on the name of Yahweh.
* Text, and (he) was. \ Text, hammerer.
||

f

Gr. Syr.

If

text, Mehuya'el. Text, 'Adham. Vul. text, then was begun.
;

Sam.;

82
v 1
-

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
This
is

[V. 1-19

the book of the generations of 'Adham. (2) At the time when God created men, in the likeness of

Male and female created he them. and called their name Man, at the time of their creation. 3 And when 'Adham had lived a hundred and thirty years, he begot a child in his own likeness [and] * after his own image and called his name Sheth. 4 And 'Adham | lived f after begetting Sheth eight hundred years, and begot sons and daughters. 5 Thus all the days that 'Adham lived were nine hundred and thirty years then he died. 6 And when Sheth had lived a hundred and five years, he begot 'Enosh. 7 And Sheth lived after begetting 'Enosh eight hundred and seven years, and begot sons and daughters. 8 Thus all the days of Sheth were nine hundred and twelve years then he died. 9 And when 'Enosh had lived ninety years, he begot Kenan. 10 And 'Enosh lived after begetting Kenan eight hundred and fifteen years, and begot sons and daughters. 11 Thus all the days of 'Enosh were nine hundred and five years then he died. 12 And when Kenan had lived seventy years, he begot 13 Mahalal'el. And Kenan lived after begetting Mahalal'el eight hundred and forty years, and begot sons and 14 Thus all the days of Kenan were nine daughters. hundred and ten years then he died. 15 And when Mahalal'el had lived sixty-five years, he
them.

God made he

2

He

also blessed them,

;

;

;

;

begot Yeredh.

16

And

Mahalal'el lived after begetting

Yeredh eight hundred and thirty years, and begot sons and daughters. 17 Thus all the days of Mahalal'el were eight hundred and ninety-five years then he died. 18 And when Yeredh had lived a hundred sixty-two 19 And Yeredh lived after beyears, he begot Hanokh.
;

* Gr.

\ Ar.

;

text, the

days of 'Adham were.

V. I9-VI. 4]

TRANSLATION
^Thus

83

getting

Hanokh

daughters.

eight hundred years, and begat sons and all the days of Yeredh were nine
;

hundred and sixty-two years then he died. 21 And when Hanokh had lived sixty-five years, he begot Methushelah. ^And Hanokh walked with God after begetting Methushelah three hundred years, and begot sons and daughters. ^Thus all the days of Hanokh were three hundred and sixty-five years. M But Hanokh walked with God, and was not, for God had taken him. 25 And when Methushelah had lived a hundred and ^And Methueighty-seven years, he begot Lemekh. shelah lived after begetting Lemekh seven hundred and 27 Thus eighty-two years, and begot sons and daughters. nine were hundred of Methushelah and all the sixtydays nine years then he died. 28 And when Lemekh had lived a hundred and eightytwo years he begat a son. 29 And he called his name Noah, saying, He will ease us of our work and the toil of our hands from the ground, which Yahweh hath
;

cursed.

30

And Lemekh

lived after begetting

Noah

five

hundred and ninety-five years, and begot sons and daugh31 ters. Thus all the days of Lemekh were seven hundred and seventy-seven years then he died. 32 And when Noah had become five hundred years old, Noah begot Shem, Ham, and Yepheth. c vi 1 Now it came to pass, when men had begun to multiply on the face of the ground, and daughters had been born to them, 2 that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were fair, and they took to themselves as wives whomsoever they chose.
;
-

3

And Yahweh

said,

My spirit shall not abide in men forever,
4

since they also are flesh

and twenty years.

but their days shall be a hundred * [Now] the giants were in the
;

* Gr. Sam. Syr.

84

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[VI. 4-16

earth in those days, and also afterwards, when the sons of God came to the daughters of men, and these bore them children. They are the heroes that of old were the men of renown. 5 Now when Yahweh saw that the wickedness of men was great in the
hearts

and that every design of the thoughts of their was only and always evil, 6 then was Yahweh that he had made men in the earth, yea he was sorry
earth,

Therefore Yahweh said, I will have created off the face of the ground, not only men, but cattle, and creeping things, and the birds of for I heaven, sorry that I made them. 8 But Noah
grieved to his heart.
I
7

wipe men whom

am

found favor

in the eyes of

Yahweh.

9 These are the generations of Noah. Noah 3, a (i) (a) was a just, a perfect man among his fellows Noah walked with God. 10 And Noah begot three sons, Shem, Ham, and Yepheth. n But the earth became corrupt before God yea, the earth became full of violence. 12 And when God saw that lo, the earth was corrupt, because all flesh had perverted its way on the earth, 13 God said to Noah, The end of all flesh hath come before me, for the earth is filled with violence on account of them therefore lo, I will destroy them and *
:

;

;

Make thyself an ark of cypress wood. In cells shalt thou make the ark, and thou shalt smear it 16 within and without with bitumen. And this is how thou shalt make it Three hundred cubits shall be the
the earth.
14
:

and [and] f fifty cubits its width 16 cubits its shalt thou thirty provide for height. Light the ark, finishing it within a cubit of the top and the
length of the ark
;
;
;

door of the ark shalt thou place in the side of it. With a lower, a second, and a third story shalt thou make it.
* Gr.
;

text, with.

\ Gr.

Sam. Syr.

VI.
17

1

7-VI 1. 7]

TRANSLA TION

85

For lo, I will bring the Flood water upon the earth, destroying all flesh in which is a living spirit under heaven ; 18 all that is in the earth shall perish. But I will establish
covenant with thee, and thou shalt go into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and the wives of thy 19 Also of all * the * beasts,* of all flesh, sons, with thee.

my

two of each

alive with thee

shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep a male and a female shall they be.
;

them 2 Of

the birds after their kinds, and of the cattle after their kinds, [and] f of all the creeping things of the ground
after their kinds,

two

it to thee, that it may be for thee and them to eat. ^ And Noah did so just as God commanded him, so he did. v"- 1 Then Yahweh said to Noah, Come thou, and (b) all thy house, into the ark for thee have I found righteous before me in this generation. 2 Of all the clean cattle thou shalt take to thee by sevens, a male and his mate, but of the cattle that are not clean by J twos, J a male and his mate 3 also of the [clean] birds of heaven by sevens, a male and a female, [and of all the birds that are not clean by twos, a male and a female,] to keep alive seed on the face of the whole earth. 4 For in yet seven days I will bring upon the earth a rain of forty days and forty nights, and I will wipe all the beings that I have made off the face of the ground. 5 And Noah did just as Yahweh had com-

kept eaten and gather

alive.

21

Do

of each shall come to thee to be thou also take of every food that is

for

;

;

;

||

manded him.

Now Noa was six hundred years old when 7 the Flood happened water on the earth. And Noah, and his sons, and his wife, and the wives of his sons with him,
6

(2) (a)

* Gr. Sam.; text, every thing that liveth. Gr. Sam. Syr. t Gr. Sam. Syr.

\ Gr.
||

Sam. Syr.

Gr.

86

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[VII. 7-21

went

Flood.

into the ark on account of the "water of the 8 Of the clean cattle, and of the cattle that are not clean,
birds,

and of the

and

[of]

*

all

that creep
10

on the ground,
it

9

there

came by twos

to

Noah

into the ark a

male and a female, as

Yah-

weh f had commanded

Noah.

And

came

to pass,

that in the seven days the water of the Flood was on the earth. n In the six hundredth year of the life of Noah, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of on that day all the sluices of the great the month, rent were open and the windows of heaven undone deep 12 and the rain was on the earth forty days and forty
;

went Noah, and Shem, and J the sons of Noah, and the wife of Noah, and the three wives of his sons with him into the ark 14 they, and all the beasts after their kinds, and all
nights.
that very day

^On

Ham, and Yepheth,
;

the cattle after their kinds, and all the creeping things that creep on the earth after their kinds, and all the
birds
16

after

their

kinds,

Moreover, they came to
flesh in
||

every bird of every feather. Noah into the ark by twos of
;

all the

which was a living spirit 16 and they that came came a male and a female of all flesh, as God had commanded him. Then Yahweh shut him in. 17 Now when the Flood had been forty days on the earth, the water increased and lifted the ark, and it rose off the earth. 18 And the water prevailed and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark moved on the face of the water. 19 Yea, the water prevailed very greatly on the earth, so that all the high mountains that are under all heaven were covered. ^Fifteen cubits upward did the water 21 Thus all prevail, and the mountains were covered. flesh that moved on the earth perished, even birds, and cattle and beasts, and all the swarm that swarmed on the
* Gr. Sam. Syr. \ Sam. omits.
+

Sam. Vul. Onk.
Gr. Syr.
;

;

text,

God.
||

text,

them.

Sam. omits.

VII. 2I-VIII. ii]

TRANSLATION

87

earth,
trils

and

was

ffl all mankind. Everything in whose nosthe breath of the* spirit* of * life, of all that

was on
out
all

the dry land, died. ^ Thus Yahweh f wiped the beings that were on the face of the ground,
cattle,

not only men, but

and creeping things, and birds of heaven

;

yea, they were wiped off the earth,

and there were left only Noah and those that were with him in the ark. ^ And

the water prevailed on the earth a hundred and fifty days, (b) v^But God remembered Noah, and all the beasts,

and God all the cattle that were with him in the ark caused a wind to pass over the earth, and the water fell. 2 Moreover, the sluices of the deep and the windows of Then the rain from heaven heaven were closed. 3 and the water continually withdrew from ceased,

and

;

the earth. Thus the water decreased from the end of a hundred and fifty days; 4 and in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, the ark grounded on the mountains of 'Ararat. 6 But the water continued to
decrease until the tenth month

the

in the tenth month, on month, the tops of the mountains ap6 Now it came to pass at the end of forty peared. that Noah opened the window of the ark, that days, he had made, 7 and sent forth a raven; which -went to and fro continually until the water dried off the earth. 8 Then he sent forth from him a dove, to see whether the water had subsided off the face of the ground. 9 But the dove found no resting-place for the sole of its foot therefore it returned, for there was water on the and he stretched forth his face of the whole earth, and it to him into the ark. and took it, brought hand, 10 Then he waited yet seven days more, and again sent a dove forth from the ark ll and the dove came to him at eventide, and lo, there was a fresh olive leaf in
;

first

of the

:

;

* Gr. omits.

f

Text &*
>

88
its

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[VIII. 11-22

mouth. Then Noah knew that the water had subsided off the earth. 12 But he waited yet seven days more and sent forth a dove that did not return to

him again. 13 Thus it came to pass, that in the six hundred and first year [of the life of Noah],* in the first month, on the first day of the month, the water had dried
Then Noah removed the covering of off the earth. the ark, and looked, and lo, the face of the ground was dry. 14 Even in the second month, on the twentyseventh day of the month, was the earth dry.
(3)
(

a)

15

Then God spake
and thy

to

from the

ark, thou,

wife,

Go forth Noah, saying, and thy sons, and the
16

wives of thy sons with thee. 17 A11 the beasts, [also],f that are with thee, of all flesh, even the birds, and the cattle, and all the creeping things that creep on the earth,
bring forth with thee, that they may swarm in the earth, and increase and multiply on the earth. 18 So Noah went
forth,

and
all

his sons,
19

and

his wife,
all

and the wives
all

of his

sons with him.

[Also] J

the beasts, and
that

and
20

the

creeping
families,

things

the birds, creep on the
ark.

earth, after

their

went forth from the

an altar to Yahweh, and, taking of all the clean cattle and all the clean birds, he offered burnt offerings on the altar. 21 And when Yahweh
built

Then Noah

smelled the pleasant odor, Yahweh said to himself, I will not again curse the ground on men's account, because the design of the hearts of men is evil from their youth nor will I again smite everything that ffi While the earth endureth, liveth, as I have done. seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.
;

* Gr.

f Gr.
;

Sam.

Syr.

\ Gr.

Sam. Syr.

Sam.

text, all the

creeping things, after beasts, and every thing-

thai creepeth, after birds.

IX. i-i5]
(b)
2

TRANSLATION
blessed

89
his sons

"^Then God

Noah and

and said
;

and multiply, that ye may fill the earth so shall the fear of you, and the dread of you, be on all the beasts of the earth, and on all the birds of heaven,
to them, Increase

with all with which the water teemeth, and all the fish of the sea into your hands are they given. 8 Every moving thing that liveth shall be yours to eat like the green
;
;

give you ye shall not eat.
will I

herb,

I

all.

4

Only

flesh -with its life, its blood,
lives,

6

Moreover, for your blood, your
;

make demand
;

for

it

also at

any beast the hands of men,
of

will I

make demand
hand
of each

at the

one's brother, will I make demand for the lives of men. 6 He that sheddeth men's blood, by men shall his blood be shed for in the image of God made he men. 7 Increase rather, and multiply [and] * swarm in the earth and exercise f lordship f over it.
;
;

his sons with him, covenant with you and my 10 also with all the living creayour offspring after you tures that are with you, even the birds, [and] J the cattle,
(c)

8

Then God spake
9

to

Noah and

saying,

Lo,

I

will establish
;

and

all

the beasts of the earth with you

:

from

all

that

go forth from the ark to all the beasts of the earth. 11 Yea, I will establish a covenant with you, that all flesh
shall not again

be cut

off

by the water

of a flood,

and

that there shall not again be a flood to ravage the earth. 12 God also said, This is the sign of the covenant that I
will place

that
I

between me and you, and every living creature with you, to endless generations 13 My bow will place in the clouds, that it may be a sign of a coveis
:

nant between

me and

the earth.

14

So

shall

it

come

to

pass, that, when I overspread the earth with a cloud, the bow shall appear in the cloud 15 that I may remember
;

my

covenant that

is

between
f
>

me

and you, and every

liv-

* Gr. Sam. Syr.

Text multiply.

\ Gr. Sam. Syr.

90

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
all flesh,

[IX. 15-29

ing thing of

and that the water may not again
is
is

16 a flood destroying all flesh. When the bow in the cloud, I shall see it and remember that there

become

an endless covenant between God and every living crea17 And God said ture, of all flesh, that is on the earth. to Noah, This is the sign of the covenant that I establish between me and all flesh that is on the earth. 18 Now the sons of Noah, that went forth from b. the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Yepheth and Ham was the father of Kena'an. These three were the sons of Noah, and from these the whole earth spread them20 selves abroad. Then Noah, the husbandman, 21 planted the first vineyard and, drinking of the wine, he became drunk and exposed himself within his tent. ^ Now when Ham, the father of Ken a -an saw the nakedness of his father, he told his two brethren without. ^ Then Shem and Yepheth took a
; ;

cloak and, placing it upon the shoulders of both of them, went backward and covered the nakedness of their father their faces being backward, so that 24 But they saw not the nakedness of their father. when Noah awoke from his wine and learned what his youngest son had done to him, 25 he said,
;

Cursed be Kena'an

:

Lowest
26

of servants shall

he be to his brethren.
:

He

said also,

Blessed of *

Yahweh * be * Shem

And let Kena'an be a servant 27 May God enlarge Yepheth.
Yea,
let
let

to him.

And
28

him dwell in the tents of Shem Kena'an be a servant to him.

:

years.

And Noah lived after the a Thus all the
fifty

Flood three hundred and fifty days of Noah were nine hundred

and

years

;

then he died.
* Text, be Yahweh

God of.

X. i-i8]
Xil

TRANSLATION

91

Now these are the generations of the 4, a, (i) (a) and there sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Yepheth were born to them sons after the Flood. 2 The sons
;

Yepheth were Gomer, and Maghogh, and Maday, and 3 And Yawan, and Tubhal, and Moshekh,* and Tiras.
of

Gomer were 'Ashkenaz, and Riphath, and 4 And the sons of Yawan were 'Elishah Togharmah. and Tarshish, Kittites and Rodhanites.f 6 From these
the sons of

the coasts of the nations dispersed themselves. [These were the sons of Yepheth] in their lands, each after his
tongue, after their families, in their nations. 6 And the sons of Ham were Kush, and Misrayim, (b) and Put, and Kena'an. 7 And the sons of Kush were

Sebha, and Hawilah, and Sabhtah, and Ra'mah, and Sabhtekha; and the sons of Ra'mah were Shebha and Dedhan. 8 Now Kush begot Nimrodh he was the
:

first

become a potentate in the earth. mighty in hunting before Yahweh therefore it is
to
;

9

He was
Like

said,

Nimrodh, mighty

in hunting before

Yahweh.

10

And

the

beginning of his
11

kingdom was Babhel, and 'Orekh,J

and 'Akkadh, and Kalneh in the land of Shin'ar. From that land he went forth to 'Asshur and built Nineweh, and Rehobhoth-4r, and Kalah, 12 and Resen between Nineweh and Kalah that is the great city. 13 And Misrayim begot Ludhites, and 'Anamites, and u and Pathrusites, and Lehabhites, and Naphtuhites, Kasluhites, whence went forth Pelishtites, and Kaphto15 And Kena'an begot Sidhon, his firstborn, and rites.
;

and the Yebhusite, and the 'Emorite, and the Girand the Hiwwite, and the 'Arkite, and the Sinite, 18 and the 'Arwadite, and the Semarite, and the Hamathite; and afterwards the families of the Kena'anite spread

Heth,

16

gashite,

17

* Gr. Sam. Text, Meshekh. \ Gr. text, 'Erekh.
; ;

f Gr.

Sam.

;

Text, Dodhanitcs.

92

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[X. i8-XI. 3

themselves abroad. 19 Thus the border of the Kena*anite was from Sidhon as far as Gerar, unto 'Azzah, as far as Sedhom, and Amorah, and 'Adhmah, and Seboyim, unto Lesha'. 20 These are the sons of Ham, after their
'

families, after their tongues, in their lands, in their nations.

Children were born to Shem also, the father of the sons of Ebher, the elder brother of Yepheth. 22 The sons of Shem were 'Elam, and 'Asshur, and 'Arpakhshadh, and Ludh, and 'Aram. ^And the sons of 'Aram were 'Us, and Hul, and Gether, and Mash. 24 And
21

(c)

all

k

25

'Arpakhshadh begot Shelah, and Shelah begot 'Bbher. To 'Bbher also were born two sons the name of the one was Pelegh, for in his days the earth was separated, and the name of his brother was Yoktan. 26 And Yoktan begot 'Almodhadh, and Sheleph, and Hasarmaweth, and Yerah, 27 and Hadhoram, and 'Uzal, and 28 and Obhal, and 'Abhima'el, and Shebha, Diklah, 29 and 'Ophir, and Hawilah, and Yobhabh. All these the sons were of Yoktan. 30 And their abode was from Mesha to Sephar, the eastern mountain. 31 These were
;

4

the sons of Shem, after their families, after their tongues, in their lands, in * their nations. 32 These are the families
of the sons of Noah, after their generations, in their nations ; and from these the nations dispersed themselves
in the earth after the Flood.

Now the whole earth was of one language and had the same words. 2 And it came to pass, as they moved eastward, that they came upon a plain in the land of Shin'ar, and there they abode. 8 Then said they one to another, Come, let us mould bricks and burn them thoroughly. Thus they had brick for stone, and bitumen they had for mortar.
l

"

(2)

* Gr. Syr.

;

text, after.

XI. 4-i8]
4

TRANSLA TION

93

They said also, Come, let us build ourselves a city, and a tower with its top in heaven, that we may

make

ourselves a name, lest the face of the whole earth.
of

we
5

be scattered over

down to see the city, men had built. 6 And Yahweh
all

But Yahweh came and the tower that the sons
said,

Lo they

are

one people, and they

have one language; and

this is their first exploit. they plan to do will be too

And now

nothing that

hard for them. 7 Come, let us go down and there confound their language, so that they will not understand one another's lan8 Thus Yahweh scattered them thence over guage. the face of the whole earth, and they ceased from 9 Therefore they called its name building the city. because there Yahweh confounded the Babhel, of the whole earth, and thence Yahweh language scattered them over the face of the whole earth. 10 These are the generations of Shem. When Shem b.
was a hundred years old, he begot 'Arpakhshadh, two n And Shem lived after after the Flood.
years

begetting

'Arpakhshadh
daughters.
12

five

hundred years, and begot sons and

And when 'Arpakhshadh had lived thirty-five years, he begot Shelah. 13 And 'Arpakhshadh lived after begetting Shelah four hundred and three years, and begot sons and daughters. 14 And when Shelah had lived thirty years, he begot 'Ebher. 15 And Shelah lived after begetting 'Ebher four hundred and three years, and begot sons and daughters. 16 And when 'Ebher had lived thirty-four years, he 17 And 'Ebher lived after begetting Pelegh begot Pelegh. four hundred and thirty years, and begot sons and daughters.
18

And when

Pelegh had lived thirty years, he begot

94

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
19

[XI. 19-32

And Pelegh lived after begetting Re'u two hunRe'u. dred and nine years, and begot sons and daughters. 20 And when Re'u had lived thirty-two years, he begot
21 And Re'u lived after begetting Serugh two Serugh. hundred and seven years, and begot sons and daughters. 22 And when Serugh had lived thirty years, he begot Nahor. ffl And Serugh lived after begetting Nahor two hundred years, and begot sons and daughters. 24 And when Nahor had lived twenty-nine years, he begot Terah. ^And Nahor lived after begetting Terah a hundred and nineteen years, and begot sons and

daughters.

And when Terah had lived seventy years, he begat 'Abhram, Nahor, and Haran. c. 27 Now these are the Terah generations of Terah. and Haran begot begot 'Abhram, Nahor, and Haran 28 And Haran died before Terah his father in Lot. the land of his birth, in 'Ur of the Kaldeans. ^But 'Abhram and Nahor took themselves wives the name of the wife of 'Abhram was Saray, and the name of the wife of Nahor was Milkah, the daughter of Haran, the father of Milkah and the father of Yiskah. 30 Now Saray was barren she had no child. 31 Then Terah took 'Abhram, his son, and Lot, the son of Haran, his grandson, and Saray, his daughter-in-law, the wife of 'Abhram, his son, and went* forth with them from 'Ur of the Kaldeans, to go to the land of Kena'an but, when 32 And the days they reached Haran, they abode there. of Terah were two hundred and five years then Terah died in Haran.
26
;

:

;

;

;

*

Syr.

;

text

makes the verb

plural.

II.

COMMENTS

THE
ditions,

first

more

eleven chapters of Genesis embody the traor less elaborated, among the Hebrews with

ants.

reference to the early history of the world and its inhabitThey may therefore be treated under the general

title of

I.

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
first

(i.-xi.).

Of these eleven chapters the

three have to do

with the origin of the world and the fundamental conditions under which man was created and still exists on the
earth, or
i.

THE ORIGIN OF THINGS
exist,

(i.-iii.).

But things as they

according to the Hebrews,

are partly the product of divine activity and partly the Hence result of human disturbance of the divine plan.

there are two parts to this division, the
deals with
a.

first of

which

The

Work

of

God

(i.-ii.).

This

is

presented in two distinct accounts, which,

al-

though they agree in certain fundamental features, were written by different authors, and therefore differ from each other, not only in style and standpoint, but someSee the Introduction, p. 17 ff. times also in conception. (i) THE FIRST ACCOUNT (i. i-ii. 3), an excerpt from
the Priestly narrative,
first six of

falls into

seven paragraphs, the
six periods into

which correspond to the

which

the divine activity is divided, while the seventh describes The record of the origin of the Sabbath.

96

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[I. i

(a) The First Day (i. 1-5) begins with a dogmatic statement attributing all things to God as the First Cause. i. In the beginning, when the present order of things

had

its

origin, is the

of the earth

and

its

proper starting-point for a history inhabitants.* The sole agent in the
is

work

to

be described

God.

The name

is

one of the
vi.

peculiarities of the

Priestly style as far as Ex.

3.

See the Introduction, p. 17. It denotes the Supreme Power whose hand the writer traces in all subsequent events, and whose will he recognizes as the only moral Of him it is said, that he created, produced, standard.!
as something

new (Num.

xvi. 30),

by

his divine

energy

the next verse clearly teaches, out of previously existing materials (Isa. Ixv. 17 f.), heaven J and earth, the visible universe in its original perfection
(Isa. xl. 26), but, as

* The fact that rPQ7N"O

is

elsewhere

(Jer. xxvi.

i

;

etc.)

always

followed by a dependent Genitive has given rise to the suggestion, that the next word, N""Q create, should be, not a Perfect, but an Infinitive, and that therefore the verse should be regarded as a protasis to v. 2

(Aben Ezra) or

v. 3 (Rashi),

and

translated,

In the

beginning of GocTs creating, or, more freely, When God began to The analogy of ii. 4b points in the same create, heaven and earth.
direction.

On

the beginning,
defensible.

the other hand, Isa. xlvi. 10, where rPtWlE* from is used absolutely, shows that the present text is Of course, if the emendation suggested be adopted, no

interpretation for the introductory phrase but the one above given is admissible.
f The original of God, n^nbs being plural, is sometimes construed with a plural verb (xx. 13) or adjective (Jos. xxiv. 19), a circumstance that gives some ground for explaining it as a relic of

polytheism

among

the

Hebrews

(Baudissin, Stud.

I.

55

f.);

but

whatever may have been its origin, this author never betrays any sympathy with such a conception. On the form, see Ges. 124, i, c ; on the construction, comp. 2 Sam. vii. 23 and i Chr. xvii. 21. i The original of this word also is a plural, but, since the form in this case denotes extension, and not plurality, it should not be 124, i, a. reproduced in English. See Ges.

I. i,

2]

COMMENTS
This
is

97

(ii.

i).

the natural interpretation of the verse.

the briefest possible statement to the effect that the present frame of things owes its existence to
It is therefore

the divinity worshipped by the Hebrews. 2. The first creative act is introduced by a description of the conditions under which God began his work.

There are those who deny that

v.

2 takes the reader

back to the beginning. They contend that it describes the condition in which something, whose creation is revealed in v. i, was, when God proceeded with the execuThis view, however, requires tion of his plan (Delitzsch). a forced interpretation of the terms heaven and earth,

and ignores the demands of the structure of v. 2. It is a circumstantial sentence. In such cases the fact or
state described is regularly

contemporaneous with the

principal event, and the connective by which it is introduced, lit. and, equivalent to the English now.* This

being so, the earth can here only mean the mass of matter out of which the world was finally created; in other words, chaos. It is so called, because the author thought of "it as a single whole including tKe substance of
the earth, located where the earth was destined to remain. What was its origin he does not say. When the scene
opens,
it

is

there,

waste and

void, a mere expanse of

The abmatter, without either features or inhabitants. sence of life is partly explained by the darkness that was on the face of the deep. Deep, being the parallel
of earth, the

word used

in the first half of

the

line,

con-

firms the correctness of the interpretation given to the
latter, at

the same time disclosing more perfectly the To him it author's conception of the nature of chaos. was a mass of water, under which a solid element was

submerged.
picturing the

See v. 9 also Ps. same thing, says,
;

civ.

6,

where the

poet,

* See Ges.

142,

i,

R

i.

98

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
" With the deep, as with a garment, thou coveredst The water lay over the mountains."

[I. 2, 3

it;

The Babylonians had the same conception.* They, however, represented chaos as antedating the Creator. Not so the Hebrew author. He teaches that, when
time began, the spirit of God, the unseen, but mighty, Agency by which creation was wrought, brooded, was In other words, brooding, over the face of the water. he does not assert the of God, he does although eternity not permit one to think of anything as existing before or
without the Deity. Compare the Babylonian myth according to which the earliest gods sprang from chaos. Note also that, unlike the Phoenicians, in whose cosmogi.

" " ony a spirit plays an important part (Baudissin, Stud. 11, 44 f.) he betrays no tendency toward pantheism. God at once comes to expression God said, at 3. the same time exerting, through his spirit, the power by which his will was fulfilled. Hence the expression spirit
;

of God is used interchangeably with word of God.
Ps. xxxiii

Comp.

light, a prime requisite for the calculation of time, as well as a necessary condition for the existence of life of any sort
civ. 30.
first

6 and

He

commanded

on the earth
its

;

and there was

of preparation or

fulfilment.!

light, without an interval between the command and development It 1S useless to attempt to explain the

One of their accounts of creation says that primevally " all the lands were sea " (Schrader, KB, vi. 1, 40 f. Ball, LE, 19 Jastrow, RBA, 445); and another that
*
; ;

" There

was a time when heaven above was
below as yet did not exist
;

not,

When earth

The primal Ocean generated them, The raging Deep was mother to them

both."

See Schrader,

KB,

vi. I,

2

f.;

KAT,

i

ft .

;

Ball,

LE,

2;

comp.
is

Jensen, Kosmologie, 272. f In the Babylonian myth the test of Marduk's supremacy

his

I.

3-5]

COMMENTS
in

99

source or nature of this light
theories of

harmony with the
solar light
;

modern

science.

It

was neither

since the author (Murphy) nor nebular light (Guyot) knows of matter except the undivided nothing clearly any mass of which the surface was entirely water. To the question, How can there have been light without a lumi-

nous body to produce

it ?

he would doubtless have replied

power from God, there was no difficulty in believing that the same effect might be, and originally was, produced by the
divine
fiat,

that, since the sun, etc., received their illuminating

without the intervention of such instruments.

He therefore represents the Cre19 f. ator as not only commanding light, but ordaining the alternation of light and darkness, before the heavenly
See Job
xxxviii.

luminaries

when

it

Com p. Murphy. 43. The light, was found good; not in comparison appeared,
existed.*

God still with the darkness that preceded it (Gunkel), has a use for that, but as perfectly suited to the divine
purpose.
4b.

See

Ps. civ. 31.

The remainder of v. 4 belongs with the first half of v. 5. The two together describe the origin of day and God separated the light from the darkness night.
;

fixed definite limits for their duration,

and ordained that

they should thenceforth alternate with each other in the He called the light, or, strictly, that part world. 5 a.
of the diurnal period during which light reigns, Day, as and the darkness, or it has ever since been termed
;

the part during which darkness reigns, he called Night. 5b. The author, as has already been remarked, does
ability to

make

See Schrader,

KB,

a garment vanish and reappear at his vi. i, 22 f. ; Ball, LE, 8.

command.

* The Babylonians also represented light as existing before the creation of the heavenly bodies, the solar deity, Marduk, being a son of one of the great gods (Gunkel, SC, 1 16).

ioo

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
;

[I.

5

not seem to have thought of God as requiring any given length of time for his works yet, between those just described and the one to follow, it became evening, the

evening of the first bright period after the creation of Then, after the interval of darkness for which light. the divine wisdom had provided, it became morning, the
-

second morning.
constituted

The whole interval between the two one day. The meaning of the word day in
Some, following Augustine,

this connection is disputed.

figuratively, as an indefinitely extended period, because (/) it is indefinite in ii. 4 and elsewhere, and in

take

it

Ps. xc.
;

God and

4 a thousand years are said to be as a day with (2) there was as yet no sun by which a natural
is

day could be measured.
this interpretation

The basal reason, however, for that it is (j) required to harmonize the teaching of the Bible with the results of scientific
irrelevancy of all these arguments is question is not, what the word may, but what it actually does mean and this must be determined by examining it in the relations in which it is employed,
investigation.

The

apparent.

The

;

without reference to the demands of modern science or An examination of this sort confirms the imtheology.
pression made upon the casual reader viz., that day here means simply a period of twenty-four hours. (/) This interpretation is in harmony with the writer's evi;

dent purpose, to describe the origin of the visible world and its more salient phenomena. See the literal heaven of v. 8, and the literal earth and sea of v. 10. (2) The

day

in

question

commenced

in

the morning,

as

the

literal

day originally did among the Hebrews, as well as among the Babylonians (Enc. Bib. Art. Day\ and consisted of a light portion called by a familiar name, and
(J)
first

a dark portion similarly designated. seven days, the last of which was the

It

is one of Sabbath in

I.

5-7]

COMMENTS

101

the world's history. (4) The literal interpretation furnishes a starting point for time and the author's careful

system of chronology.
it

Finally, (5)

as

has been

suggested, the account to suppose that, to the mind of its author, God required time for the production of his works. These considerations show that the traditional is, in this
case, the natural

is

inconsistent with the whole tenor of

and rational interpretation, while that which gives the word day a figurative meaning of any
sort
is

mistaken.

Com p.

Delitzsch.

(b)

The Second Day

(vv. 6-8).

6.

The second morn-

ing dawned on the same watery waste described in In this God commanded that there should shape v. 2.
itself

an expanse,

a solid partition, in the middle, and

parallel
lateral

with the surface, of the division in the fluid mass

:

water making a and so it was.*
;

The

the place of a repetition of the prewith an effect much the same as that sentence, ceding produced in v. 3. The impression here also is that the
last clause takes

divine
7.

command was no sooner given than fulfilled. Thus God made the expanse. The material of which it was made is not indicated, but the following

words describe more fully the purpose that it served. Itf separated the water that was under it, the water eventually collected into the sea of Hebrew geography (v. 10), from the water that was above it, the water stored in the unseen celestial reservoirs (Ps.
*

The Hebrew

text inserts these

words

at the

end of

their occurrence

immediately after the creative

command

v. 7 ; but in vv. 9,

n, 15, and 24 shows that the Greek Version, which is here followed, has the correct reading. t The text has God, but the preceding verse shows that the subject is the expanse.

So

the Syriac Version.

102

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
to be
1 1
;

[I.

7-9

cxlviii. 4),

poured as a curse or a blessing
1

upon the

earth
8.

(vii.

Ps. civ.

3).

This

solid structure,

by which the Hebrews repre-

sented the earth as overarched (Prv. viii. 27 f.),* and above which they located the dwelling of the Almighty

(Am.

ix.

6

;

Ps. civ. 3),

God

called

Heaven.

Following

this statement the reader misses, in the original, as well as in the English Version, the declaration that finds a cor-

responding place in all the other sections of this chapter. The omission is sometimes explained (/) by supposing
that the author restricted himself in the use of
it

to seven

times, or (2) that, since neither heaven nor earth was as yet complete, he did not think it appropriate in the

Neither of these reasons, howpresent case (Delitzsch). On the second, see v. 10. ever, has much weight. Hence it seems safe to assume that here, also, the writer
added,

and God saw that
The Third bay

it

was

good, f
9.

(c)

(vv. 9-12).

The removal

of

the water above the expanse did not change the face of the rest of chaos. It was still, to all appearance, entirely God next commanded the water under heaven water.
* The Babylonians also see Jensen, Kosmologie, 9 f. f The Babylonians represented heaven as formed from one half of the body of Tiamat, when Marduk slew her. The following are the lines from the Creation Epic bearing on the subject
;
:

"

He

split her, like

a flattened

fish, in

two

;

Took half of Then drew a

her and

made
let

it

heaven's vault ;

bolt across

and stationed guards,
her water forth."

Them

charging not to

See Schrader, KB, vi. i, 30 f. Ball, LE, n Jastrow, RBA, 428 Berosus interpreted this as comp. Jensen, Kosmologie, 343. meaning that Bel (Marduk) divided the primeval darkness, and thus separated earth and heaven (Cory, AF, 59).
; ; ;

1.

9-n]

COMMENTS

103

to gather itself into one mass,* a more compact body, that dry ground,! the solid element hitherto concealed,

might appear
10.

;

and

this also took place.

Here, again, the original is defective; and here, the Greek Version supplies the missing statement, again, Thus the water under heaven gathered itself into

mass, and dry ground appeared. The way in which this result was produced is not explained, but, as the author seems to have believed, with other Hebrews, that the land was not only surrounded by, but supported on the water (vii. n Ex. xx. 4; Ps. xxiv. 2),J he may have thought of it as making its appearance by simply coming to the surface. See the picturesque description
its
;

of Ps. civ. 7

ff.

;

also

Job

xxxviii. 8

ff.

In harmony with

this conception

God

called

the

mass

as a single whole, Sea, not seas.\ that land and sea are pronounced

of water, viewed Comp. E. V. Note

good under circumstances precisely such as those under which the present text of v. 8 omits this formula. Hence, the principal
reason usually given for
invalid.
11. To the work already wrought God now, as in the case of the sixth day, adds a second the land, freed from its watery covering and exposed to the quickening influence of the light, is commanded to put forth vege:

its

omission in that passage

is

tation of

all

kinds.

The

various species are grouped

* The original has Q1pB place, but, since the Greek Version has the equivalent of mass, and this word is used in v. 10 for the thing here signified, the substitution of the latter for the for-

mp>

mer seems
f

justified.

See

Ball.

original has the dry ground, but the analogy of etc., requires that the article be omitted. Comp. Ball.

The

TIN

(v. 3),

See Jensen, Kosmologie, 253. but here, as in the cases of the words for heaven and water, the form denotes, not plurality, but extension. See Ges. 124, i, a.
J
also the Babylonians. original
is plural,

So

The

104

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
first

[1.11-14

under two heads, the

of

which

is

the herb, the

smaller plants, including grasses for animals, and grains
xiv.

and vegetables for both them and man (vv. 29 f. Jer. 6; Deu. xi. 15; Ps. civ. 14); yielding seed, by which they may be reproduced after its kind,* with
; ;

the herb's, characteristics. The second order, the tree,f is described as bearing fruit, wherein, i. e., in the fruit, is its seed, the seed by which the tree is to
its,
i.

e. y

be propagated, after its kind,J on the earth, of which
the land
12.
is

The

only a part. land put forth,

as
||

tion of the kinds described

;

was commanded, vegetaand again, for the fourth

time, the Creator

was well pleased.
(vv.

(d)

The Fourth Day

14-20).

14.

The work

of

the fourth day completes that of the first. day God created light; on the fourth, he

On

the

first

commanded

that there be lights.' The language used implies that, previous to this time, nothing of the kind had existed.
* This 'phrase, omitted in the Hebrew text, On the form ITWobi see Ges. 91, i, R
supplied from v. b; on the meanThe Greek Version adds after
is
i,

12.

ing comp. Frd. Delitzsch, likeness both here and in v.
f

HA,
1

70

f.

2.

The

text

has fruit-tree, but this
12,

is

too restricted, and, as

original reading. J The text inserts this phrase after fruit, but by such an arrangement the relative wherein is separated from its antecedent, and the

appears from v.

was not the

meaning obscured. The difficulty is avoided by adopting, as is done above, the Greek reading. The form, moreover, in the
original should be, not,

13^^
is

but

liia^S

as elsewhere, except in

Lev.

xi. 15,

22 and Deu. xiv.
earth

14.

The rendering
it is
||

haps the whole phrase, which
in the next verse.

necessary to avoid tautology. Peris superfluous, should be omitted as
;

The

S"in

let it

present text, probably, as Ball suggests, by mistake, has cause to go forth, instead of the NB?"rn let it cause to

shoot, of the preceding verse.

I. 14,

15]

COMMENTS
is

105

This natural inference
creation as

new phenomena

confirmed by v. 16, where their in the world is distinctly

affirmed. Comp. Murphy. These lights are to be in the expanse of heaven. This expression must be If the interpreted in the light of what has preceded. author really thought of heaven as a material canopy, he must have shared to some extent the primitive conception with reference to the heavenly bodies which was current in his time, to the effect that they were in some way attached to it.* These bodies were to serve several In the first place, they were to distinguish purposes. both had already been between, not to produce,

created,

day and

night, as adjuncts of these divisions

were also to be signs, indi(Num. xxi. n), changes in the weather (Mat. xvi. 2 f.), and extraordinary events Next, they were to mark .the (Joel iti. 3 f.; ii. 30 f.). return of civil and ecclesiastical seasons whose dates, among the Hebrews, were generally determined by the
of the diurnal period They cating points of the compass
;

changes of the moon (Ps. civ. 19 Lev. xxiii.). Further, they were to measure days and years, as elements in the calculation of time (Jos. x. 12 I Kgs. xx. 22). enumerated these four functions of the 15. Having the author adds the one that bodies, heavenly finally would be the first to suggest itself to a modern thinker,
;
;

to shed light

upon the earth doubtless for the purpose of explaining why, although the existence of light was not dependent on them, there was more of it when they appeared than when they were invisible.!
;

*
f

On

the Babylonian idea, see Jastrow,

RBA, 442,

455.

beginning (v. 14), as well as at the end, of the list but the reading is probably an imitation, conscious or unconscious, of vv. 15 and 17. Compare
;

The Samaritans have

this specification at the

also the

Greek Version, which

prefixes to light the earth

and

to

rule day

and night

to v. 14.

106
1

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
6.

\\.

16-18

The

writer distinguishes

two great
larger than

the sun and the
the

i. e., preside over, day, the lesser in like manner to rule night.* He merely mentions the stars, giving no hint of their actual size or their immense distance from the earth, f 17. These luminaries God placed in the expanse, assigning them their places with reference to one another and their courses across the face of heaven and
;

moon were both former being made to rule,

lights, as if all the rest ;

they began to perform the functions described. Notice, however, that, in repeating his account of these functions, the author takes greater liberties than he has heretofore allowed himself. Thus, the first of the previous enumeration

now becomes the
earth, the

last,

and the

last,

to shed light

upon the

first.

1 8. Moreover, no reference is here made to the appointment of the lights created for signs, etc., its place being taken by a specification strictly applicable only to the sun and the moon, viz., to rule over day and

over night and in the next phrase light and darkness are substituted for the day and night of v. 14.$
;

*

On

the comparative importance of the sun and the

moon

the Babylonians, see Boscawen, BM, 57 ff. f Baudissin (Stud. i. 120 f.) thinks that the use of the term rule of the heavenly bodies, as well as the fact that their creation is

among

represented as postponed until the second half of the creative week, indicates that they were regarded by the author as personal Comp. Gunkel, SC, 9. beings. J The Babylonian account of the creation of the heavenly bodies

runs as follows
"

:

He made the stations for the greater gods The stars, like them, as constellations placed.
;

He

For each

fixed the year, and its divisions marked of the twelve months three stars he set.
;

Throughout the

year, from end to end thereof, fixed the place of Nibir [Jupiter] for their bound; That none might change its course or go astray.

He

I.

20, 21]

COMMENTS

107

The Fifth Day (vv. 20-23). Hitherto there has (e) been no animal life on the earth. God now commands that the water swarm with abundant living creaThe term swarm, with its complement, abundant, tures. lit. swarm a swarm, is intended to convey the impression
of

multitude.

The

writer,

however, does not mean to

indicate that the water

than in his own day. merely accounting for the multiplicity of life, or, as the psalmist (civ. 25) puts it, the "creeping things innumerable, both small and great beasts," with which the sea, as

was at first more thickly inhabited This is clear from v. 22. He is

he knew

it,

teemed.
;

At

the same time

God summons into

not the winged reptiles of the Jurassic period (Guyot), but, as appears from v. 21, the winged creatures popularly so designated when this account was
existence birds
written.

are to fly over the earth, across the of heaven, i. e., in the space between earth expanse and heaven. Compare the English Version, where the " is misleading.* rendering "in the open firmament

They

21.

particular,

Here, as in v. 16, the general gives place to the and the most remarkable examples take pre-

In this case it is the great monsters, not cedence. the extinct reptiles of the Jurassic period (Guyot), but the huge forms of animal life, real or imaginary, with

which the Hebrews peopled the great deep
With him he stablished Bel's and Ea's place. Then opened he on either side great doors, And made the bolt secure to left and right.

(Ps. civ.

25

;

Midway

in

heaven he the zenith

fixed.

He

sent forth

Nannar the [moon], gave night to

his charge,

Ordained him for the night, to measure days."
Ball, LE, 12; Jastrow, RBA, 434 f.). (Schrader, KB, vi. i, 30 f. In this passage the identification of the moon and the stars with
;

divine beings

is

unmistakable.

present text of this verse should be corrected by the addition of and so it was from the Greek Version.

*

The

io8

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[I.

21-24

These God created, and all the other livmoving creatures that shared with them the watery element, after their kinds ;f also every winged bird The epithet winged does not imply that the aucxlviii. 7).*

ing,

thor distinguished two kinds of birds, one of which had no wings, but simply emphasizes a familiar characteristic
of the class so described.
22. Finally, God blessed them, by giving them, as he had already given the plants, the power of perpetuating their kind. This power is bestowed upon the aquatic animals, which, however, are not mentioned by name, as one would expect them to be, in this connection, that they may fill the water in the sea. The birds, on the other hand, are to multiply on the land.

(f)

of the

The Sixth Day (vv. 24-31). land is still incomplete. It

24.
is

The furniture now commanded
of

to

produce living creatures, beings

the

same

anigeneral character as those belonging to the sea, These are divided into three general classes, mals.

of

which the
vi.

first

is

cattle, here the domestic animals.

Comp.

7.

The creeping things
;

doubtless include

not only reptiles, but all the other smaller animals that move on or near the ground which are therefore in the
next verse called creeping things of the ground. The beasts J of the earth are here the larger animals that
* Gunkel sees in these creatures a
ception of chaos, with
its

relic of the

Babylonian con-

mythical monsters, as described by
is

Berosus (SC, 17 f In the form

f.,

DH^ttb

120; Cory, AF, 58). the vocalization

that of a plural; but

the safer opinion, even if the suffix includes the sea-monsters, as well as the other aquatic animals, is that the noun is here, as in all

other cases in which

it i.

is

found, a singular.
90, 3,

See Ew.

247,

d;

comp. Ges.
t

91, 2,

R

On

the form

VTn

see Ges.

b; comp.

v. 25.

The

Samaritans read /TIT

1.

24-26]

COMMENTS

109

" roam at large and " seek their meat from God (Ps. civ. According to Ps. civ. 29, as well as Gen. il 19, all 21).

these animals were

made

of the material of the
live

ground

on which they were destined to
25.

and move.

mand

In reporting the fulfilment of the divine comthe author employs the same terms that he has

just used in a different order, but the

change to beasts

of the earth, cattle and creeping things does not

any significance. There is probably just the omission of a formal blessing on these animals, such as was bestowed upon those of the sea and the air. If it was intentional, the reason can only be a

seem

to have

as

little in

desire to avoid the repetition, at this point, of a formula

Comp. Delitzsch.* easily supplied from v. 22. 26. On the sixth, as on the third day, there
creative acts.
lord

were two

The second was

the production of nature's

and God's masterpiece. calculated to attract attention.

be, or, Let the land bring hand a matter in which he took more than usual interest, Let us make. It is a mistake to find in the employment here of a plural subject (/) an assertion of the

The phraseology used is God says, not, Let there forth, but, as if he now had on

majesty of God (Gesenius), (2) a summons to his divine powers (Dillmann), or (j) an intimation of the doctrine of the Trinity (Murphy). It is best interpreted as
revealing the belief of the author in the existence, before the creation of men, of a race of intelligences even nearer to God than his human children were destined
* There are fragments of a Babylonian account of the creation
of the land animals, in which the terms used are those employed by the Hebrews. One of them says,
"

The

gods,

when they together framed
come
forth

[the world],

Created [heaven] and ordained [the earth],

Caused

living creatures to

.

.

.

,

The
(Schrader,

cattle, the

wild beasts, the creeping things."
;

KB,

vi. I,

42

f.

Ball,

LE,

13.)

i

io

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
There are other references
i

[1.26

to such a heavenly Kgs. xxii 19; Job i. 6; Ps. xxix. 9); which, according to Job xxxviii. 7, existed when the foundations of the earth were laid.* The objection that, to stand.

court

(e.

g.,

" by addressing the sons of God in these terms, the Creator would have made them sharers in one of his divine prerogatives (Dillmann) is easily met since the form used, like the French assister, is warranted as
;

"

merely recognizing the presence of interested spectators. See Isa. vi. S.j- The last of God's works is to be man in
the collective sense, i. e., men.J The nature of these new creatures is described in the phrase in our image but not so clearly as it might have been, as is shown by the difference of opinion with reference to the meaning
;

From v. 27 it appears that by our meant the image of God. The equivalence of these two expressions seems, at first sight, to tell against
of these words.

image

is

the interpretation of the plural pronoun just given, but the apparent discrepancy disappears, when one reflects that the image of God is also the image of the sons of " God. The fact that, in v. 27, the phrase " image of God

takes the place of both of those here used shows that after his likeness is synonymous with the expression The further question, preceding. Comp. Delitzsch.

what

is

meant by the image

of

God, seems answered

in

the remainder of the verse, where God is represented as setting forth the purpose for which men were to be created, viz.,

lordship over every
ii.

living thing,

whether of
first

*
day.

According to Jub.

i

the angels were created on the

f This is the interpretation adopted by Philo (Works, i. 21 f.), and it seems to have been the favorite with Jewish authorities. See Ber. Rab. 31 ff.

\

The verb

of the next clause

is plural.

1.26-28]

COMMENTS

in

the sea or of the land. The image of God, therefore, must consist in those endowments which distinguish men

from the lower animals, and enable the former to maintain
over the latter a mastery only inferior to that of the Creator. See ix. 2 Ps. viil 6/5 Sir. xviii. 3 comp. Gunkel. These, however, are but reflections of the divine attributes most perfectly revealed in creation.
;
;

;

None of the animals is excepted, ,even the beasts* of the earth being placed under the dominion of mankind. Some of 27. Men were created male and female. the Jewish authorities interpret these words as meaning that the human race sprang from a single androgyn, from one side (not rib) of whom God finally (ii. 21) made the first woman (Ber. Rab. 30), and Lenormant (BH, 61 ff.) adopts this interpretation but there is absolutely no in;

In fact, it is forbidden by ternal evidence to support it. See also the terms of the blessing at once bestowed.
v. 2.

The

author does not here indicate

how many

of

the genus homo were created, but the sequel (v. 3) shows that he intended to teach that the human race, like the
various species of the lower animals, concerning which his ideas may be inferred from vl 19, had its origin in a
single pair.f
28. In the blessing bestowed on the first pair they are commissioned, not only to fill the earth, but to subdue The last phrase is especially significant. It shows it. that, to the mind of the author, the earth was not a para-

dise in

which men could

live

without

effort,

but a

field for

the employment and development of the powers, mental and physical as well as moral, with which they had been
* The text has the earth; but since
ix.

2

and

Ps.

viii.

8/7 have

the beasts of the earth, the missing word, rw~f> should doubtless be inserted in this passage. See the Syriac Version. \ The word ins is equivalent to, if not a mistake for

ii2

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
;

[11.28-31

endowed. God had worked hitherto now they were not only to enter into, but supplement, the labors of their Maker. He had made, they were to control, the entire
animal world.*
29. Men were not yet, however, permitted to kill, even for food, the animals thus placed "under their feet," but,

according to the author, were restricted to an exclusively See Ovid, Met xv. 96 ff. Still, they vegetable diet.

were generously provided for, being given to eat every herb and every tree f * ^-, all the grains and vegetables and whatever grew on the trees. 30. The lower animals, even the beasts of the earth, as well as the birds of heaven and the creeping
;

:

things,

at first

received only

every green herb for

in other words, the lion was compelled, in the " language of Isa. xi. 7, to eat straw like the ox." See

food;

The cattle and the Vergil, Gear. i. 130; comp. Strack. fish of the sea are not mentioned in this connection, per||

haps because the former are included in the term beasts of the earth (comp. Knobel), and the author could not imagine the latter as ever having subsisted on the sort
of food provided for land animals. 31. The work of this day, like that of the others,
*
It

was

The

text of the latter half of this verse

is

clearly incomplete.

should follow v. 26, as it does in the Greek, and to the extent of supplying the cattle in the Syriac Version. t For y^n read, with the Samaritans, ysComp. Ball. \ The text, for fruit, has fruit of a tree; but since, according to w. 1 1 ., it is strictly the fruit, and not the tree, that yields the seed by which the tree is reproduced, it is better, following the
to omit the limiting phrase. subject of the participle is to be supplied from the Greek Version. For tPETI the Samaritans read ^Din-

Greek Version,

The

||

The verb

give,

which

is

needed

to

make

sense,

is

wanting in

the original of this verse.

1.

31-11. i]

COMMENTS

113

good, but the usual statement to that effect is omitted. Its place is taken by God's estimate of all that he had

Viewed as a completed whole, he found it, not only satisfactory, but very good. The night that followed closed a* sixth day.f

made.

The

present arrangement of the text

is

such

as, at first

sight, to create the impression that the account of creation with which Genesis begins closes with the end of the
first

chapter.

This, however,

is

not the case, since the

record of
(g)

The Seventh Day
its its

cance of
sary to
i.

(ii. 1-3), in which the signifiarrangement as a whole appears, is neces-

The

were

completion. statement, Thus, lit. and, heaven and earth finished, doubtless means that, at the close of the

sixth day, they

were complete

;

and

all their host, not

* The present text has the definite article before the numeral, but the Greek Version omits it, and this, since there seems to be no reason why the author should adopt a peculiar mode of expression in this instance, is probably the correct reading. Comp. Ges.
126,
5,

R

i,

a.

t

The

creation of

mankind was

attributed to different deities

by

the Babylonians of ^different dates and places. In the epic from which several quotations have already been made, Marduk is the one thus honored. He is praised as
"

The

lord

Who mercy
Took from

whose spell is health, who wakes the dead showed to the defeated gods,

;

And See Schrader,

the gods, his foes, the yoke imposed, in their stead man into being brought."
;

KB, vi. i, 34 f. Ball, LE, 16 ; Jastrow, RBA, 438. so far as preserved, does not give the details of man's origin, but Berosus says that Bel (Marduk), when he saw the earth, as the result of the destruction of a preceding race of monsters, without inhabitants, bade one of the other gods cut off his head,
The poem,
mix earth with the flowing blood, and thus make men and animals that could bear the light (Gunkel, SC, 17 Cory, AF, 60).
;

ii4

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[II. 1-3.

merely the sun, moon, and stars, elsewhere called the host of heaven (Deu. iv. 19), but the entire multitude of creatures, animate and inanimate, with which, during the
preceding six days, heaven and earth had been furnished. The angels, since the author makes no reference to their
creation, although he recognizes their existence can hardly be included. Comp. Strack.
2.
(i.

26),

What

follows

must be interpreted
If,

in

harmony with

this introductory statement.

therefore, the present

text be retained, the

are rendered,

words which, in the English Version, on the seventh day God finished his work which he had made, etc., can only refer to the cessation of the activity of which the various works previThis thought is better ously described were the result.

And

expressed by the rendering,

And when, on
the,
lit.

day,

God had

put an end to

his,

the seventh work that

he had done,

i. e., had been doing, etc.* The correctness of this interpretation appears from its harmony with the obvious meaning of the latter half of the verse where
;

the statement, that

from mean

all the,
that,

lit.

God rested on the seventh day his, work that he had done can only

on the given day, he refrained from the work, the activity, in which he had previously been engaged, f 3. This seventh day, because on it he celebrated, so to
speak, the completion of his works, God blessed, gave especial honor among the days of the week and hal;

lowed, ordained that * On the construction,

should be set apart as a day on see Ges. HI, i, R 3. The versions
it
;

have the sixth day, which is adopted by Ball and others, and, at but the fact that it relieves first sight, seems the preferable reading an apparent difficulty excites suspicion, and the evidently close relation between the verbs HvO (put an end to) and H2tt7 (rest)
favors the present text.
25/10.
f

On

the meaning of
(work],

nb> see Num.

xvii.

On

the

meaning of

nDH^B

compare Brown, Lex.

I.,

II.]

COMMENTS
See Ex.
xx.

115

which men should not do any work.

9

f.

The

last

clause preserves the distinction between the

work and the works

of God, being properly rendered, not, as in the English Version, all his work, which God had created and made, but strictly, all his work, in doing which God had created, i. e., acted as Creator, or, more
freely, all
all

the creative

work

that he

had done,

/.

e.,

the work that, as Creator, he had done.* Knobel.

Comp.

A

whole.

few words with reference to this narrative as a Its value has sometimes been exaggerated, and

sometimes, especially in later years, overlooked. In the first place, the attempt has been made to show that it is If the in perfect harmony with the science of the day.f
interpretation given above
is

correct,

it

is

clear that

no

such correspondence can be established.

The modern
:

theory concerning the origin of the system to which the earth belongs may be stated briefly as follows
of the entire system, so far as can be ascertained, seems originally to have existed in a nebu-

The matter

lous form.

From

this

gaseous mass were thrown off

rings of matter, which,
in separate bodies,

when broken up and compacted became the planets and their satellites.
was
at first
ii.

The
*

earth, like the rest,

an incandescent
Ges.
1

ball

;

On

the construction, see Joel

20

f.

;

14, 2,

R 4. The

suggests the question, whether the text did not originally have the Perfect instead of the Infinitive of ntt?37 (do) as in the preceding verse, without either of

presence of

D^nbs

(God} after

S"Q

(create)

these words.

See also the f This is the position of Guyot in his Creation. works of Principal Dawson, especially his Eden Lost and Won, in which the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch and its general harmony with science and history is maintained. Dana, in the last (1895) edition of his Manual ofGeologv, omits the chapter on Cosmogony with which the book originally closed.

n6
but

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[I., II.

it gradually cooled, and, as it cooled, the vapor by which it was surrounded was condensed and the globe, which had meanwhile become solid, at least superficially, was thus more or less covered with water. The cooling

process continued until, by the consequent deformation of the spheroid, a distinction between regions of comparative elevation and depression, i. e., continents and oceans,
established. Plants and animals made their appearance as soon as their existence was possible the simplest forms first, then, as the ages passed, those of the higher

was

;

when the proper environment had been provided, the process of evolution in the animal kingdom culminated in the production of the human species. The following table, compiled from Rice's revision of Dana's Text Book of Geology shows (read upward) by what stages the development of life on the earth is supposed to have proceeded
orders, until, finally,
',

:

f

Quaternary Period.

CenoZoic

A ge
f

"7

"**

Thta.
mammals.

The

first

men. pUcental

Cretaceous Period.
Jurassic Period.

The first angiosperms. The first birds. Age
of reptiles.

Mesozoic Age <
Triassic Period.

Carboniferous Period.

The first mammals. Age of amphibia. The first reptiles. Age
of forests.

Devonian Period.

The

first

flowering

Paleozoic

Age

Silurian Period.

The first amphibia. Age of fishes. The first fishes. The first in sects. The first
plants.

land plants.

Cambrian Period.

The first marine inverThe first tebrates.
seaweeds.

Archean Age

Dubious traces of

life.

I.,

II.]

COMMENTS
biblical
:

117

The most
and the
/.

serious discrepancies between this outline account are the following
is

In the former the sun

the centre from which the
;

system is viewed and described in the latter not only the sun and the moon, but also the stars, are mere adjuncts of the earth.
2.

The
;

that belongs to

current theory represents the earth, with all it, as the result of a development requirit

ing ages

while the biblical narrative describes

as pro-

duced by a series of fiats, each of which was at once obeyed, and all of which were 'uttered within the space of
six literal days.

,

J. The order in which the principal events in the course of the earth's early history are supposed to have succeeded one another is not the same as that followed

by the sacred writer
a.

:

the current theory is correct, there must have been light long before there was any water on the surface of the globe but, according to the first chapter of GeneIf
;

sis,
b.

this is the reverse of the true order.

The

scientist claims that fishes

appeared

in

the sea

as early as plants on the land, and that there were other water animals; as well as marine plants, much earlier; but the inspired author reports that the vegetation of the

earth was created on the third, while the fishes did not appear until the fifth day.
c. Finally, the rocks testify that fishes existed ages before the land animals (except a few insects) and the latter

other ages before the first man but the biblical record states that the birds were created on the same day with the fishes, and the first human pair on the same day with
;

the rest of the land animals.

These are serious divergences, but

their significance

may be

exaggerated.

They make

it

impossible for the

Ii8

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[I., II.

intelligent student to accept the biblical account as a correct record of the process of creation ; but they do not

make it necessary for him to reject it as valueless from the religious, or even from the scientific standpoint. In the first place, although the doctrine of God here taught
can hardly be regarded as perfectly satisfactory to the Christian believer, it was sufficiently developed along
right lines to furnish a basis for religion

and morality un-

equalled in the period to which

it

belongs.

The

author's

conception of creation, too, displays a philosophic insight that is extraordinary. Indeed, in its essential features, the unity of nature and the gradual origin of things, it

harmonizes so perfectly with the modern theory that the latter should be regarded as supplemental, rather than abrogative, of the former. See Ryle, ENG, 23 ff. Finally, the fact that the Sabbath did not originate exactly as described does not warrant a denial of its sanctity for,
;

as in the case of Sunday, the antiquity of the Hebrew rest-day and the beneficent results of its observance are
sufficient to assure

that

it
1 1

one who has a sense was a providential institution.*
170.

for the divine

See Gunkel,

SC,

8,

The author hitherto followed would naturally next proceed to give a brief history of the earliest generations of the race. There is such a history, but it is separated from his account of creation by the rest of the second, and the whole of two more chapters. In other words,
*

The Babylonians from

the earliest times

seem

to

have regarded

the seventh, the fourteenth, the twenty-first, and the twenty-eighth of each month as unlucky, and therefore, on these days, to have abstained, not only from their ordinary pursuits, but even from the

presentation of sacrifices to their gods.

See Schrader,
ff.

KA T, 18

ff.

;

Boscawen,

BM,

67

f.;

Toy,/#,

1899, 190

1 1

.

4]

COMMENTS
was taken
follows
is

1 1

9

the continuation of the work from which this account of
creation
to be found in the fifth chapter.

What now
(2)
first

is
(ii.

A

SECOND ACCOUNT

4-25) of creation.

The

thing that strikes one on reading it is that it begins, not as the other.did, with the creation of light, introducing
life in

the order of

its

manifestations from the low-

est to the highest, but with
(a)

The Formation of
is

Man

(vv.

4-7).

4.

To
;

the

whole
of
x.

prefixed a

title,

These are the generations

vi. earth, such as elsewhere (v. i an introduces from the 9 etc.) always excerpt Priestly narrative, to which the preceding account beThe fact that it is here used to introduce a longed.
;

heaven and
i
;

passage from the Yahwistic narrative is explained by supposing, either that it originally stood at the begin-

ning of the first chapter, and was removed thence, when the two narratives were combined (Ilgen), or that it
originated with a redactor or copyist, by whom it was inserted to relieve the abruptness of the transition from

the

first

to the second account (Holzinger).

The former
it

of these suppositions seems the jection that the author of i. i ff.
this title being
title

more

attractive, the ob-

would not have given
vi. 9,

met by the

fact that, in

a similar

introduces, not a list of Noah's descendants, but a See also xxv. 19 xxxvii. 2.* The history of his times.
;

title is

followed by the brief temporal clause,

when they

The idea that 4a is a subscription to the account preceding (Delitzsch) must be rejected so, also, that it is the title of a missing chapter of the Priestly document (Strack). The former is for;

*

bidden by the constant usage with reference to the terms employed; and the latter by the close connection between ii. 3 and v. i ff., as well as the absence of any allusion to the hypothetical passage in
the parts of the Priestly narrative that have been preserved. The Greek Version has, This is the book of the origin of, etc., as in v. I,

and Ball adopts

this reading.

120

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
of which, as the text

[II.

4

were created,

now

stands, the re-

mainder of the verse seems a superfluous repetition. The two clauses, however, do not belong together the latter^
;

as its phraseology indicates, having origiHere, as in nally been connected with what follows.* the preceding account, there is no disposition to pry into
in

some form,

the secrets of eternity. The story opens with a picture of the condition of things at the time when Yahweh

(God)

made

earth and heaven

;

that

is,

as they were
inter-

when Yahweh began

his creative work.

The most

esting thing about this clause is the appearance in it, for the first time, of Yahweh, the proper name of the God
of the

Hebrews,

for

which the English version usually
of the

has

LORD.\

The meaning

name

is

disputed,

but, according to Ex. iii. 14 f., it seems to have designated God as the unchangeable, in the moral as well as in the metaphysical sense.J The same passage, but Ex.
vi.

2

f.

more

distinctly, teaches that

it

was not known or

*

The

original relation of

40
it

to the verses following is in dispute;

some exegetes connecting
(Dillmann).

The

latter construction

with v. 5 (Tuch), others with v. ^ seems too involved to be the
124.

one intended.

See Driver, Tenses,

until 1520 A. D., has no warrant except in a superstitious custom in accordance with which the Jews, to avoid the use of the sacred name, pointed mrp (YHIVH} with the vowels of ^1S. (?dhonay\ Lord, and, when

fThe pronunciation Jehovah, unknown

reading their Scriptures, substituted the latter for the former. See The of the English, like the 88. Bottcher, Lehrbuch, When KtJpios of the Greek Version, is a relic of this superstition. the tetragrammaton was preceded by S 2"TS to avoid the repetition

LORD

of the latter, the

Hebrews pointed the former with the vowels of D^iibs ^lohim), God; hence the excuse for the GOD of the English Bible.

J

On

the origin of this name, see Baudissin,

SSR,

i.

179

ff.

;

Frd. Delitzsch,

WLP,

158

ff.

;

Driver,
ff.

SB,

i.

I ff.

;

Schrader,

KA T,

23

ff.;

Piepenbring,

TOT,

99

11.4,5]

COMMENTS
latter
it

121

used before the time of Moses. The from the Priestly document. Hence,
that the
tion.

is

passage is not strange

name does not occur in the first account of creaThe author of the second account, having no such
it

theory, could, and did, employ
later

freely.

In this and the

following chapter, however, whenever Yahweh occurs, a

hand

has, for

some unknown

reason, perhaps to in-

sure the identification of the Deity of the second account with that of the first, inserted after it God.* The phrase

earth and heaven, found elsewhere only in Ps. cxlviii. 1 3, can hardly be correct but what the original reading
;

not impossible, to determine.! this time no At shrub, no herb, of the field ex5. The earth was a waste yet isted, much less any tree. not, at least not wholly, a watery waste, as i. 2 teaches
was,
it is difficult, if
;

that

it

was

in the beginning. J

In

of water, because

Yahweh had

fact, there was a dearth not caused it to rain

upon the

earth.

The dependence
ff.)

of vegetation

upon

* Budde (BU, 232

attributes the insertion of

God

in these

chapters to the redactor

united J 1 and J 2 the latter of which, he thinks, must have avoided Yahweh as far as iv. 26. Comp. Holzinger, EH, 157 ff. The resulting combination occurs also
,

who

30 and nine^ times outside of the Pentateuch. ancient versions all have heaven and earth, the Greek with the article. In the Samaritan Pentateuch the order is the

Ex.
f

ix.

The

same, but the

article is omitted.

If this

was the

original order, the

present reading may have been substituted for the other for the sake of variety. Since, however, the Yahwist does not elsewhere in his account of creation include heaven, it is also possible that
the original reading was earth, or the earth, without the added term. J In the second Babylonian account of creation occurs the line,
u

No

plant had sprouted, not a tree was
is

made "
;

but in this case the dearth of vegetation
that
"

explained by the fact

The

lands were
vi. I,

all

and altogether
Ball,

sea."

See Schrader,

KB,

38

ff.;

LE,

19.

122

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
is

[II.

5-7

moisture

here expressly recognized.

There was, how;

ever, another reason for the barrenness that existed

there were no
to the

men to till the
it

mind

of this author

In other words, was necessary that men should

ground.

appear contemporaneously with plants. Hence, instead of postponing the creation of the former until the earth was otherwise completely furnished, as did the Priestly
narrator,

he introduces them as soon as the ground has
fit

become

for

cultivation.

The

difference

is

funda-

mental, making it impossible to suppose that both accounts are the work of one author.
6. The necessary moisture is provided, not by opening the windows of heaven and drawing upon the celestial

reservoirs, but

A

by a

less direct

and more familiar process.

mist, naturally through the agency of Yahweh, rose from time to time from the earth,* or that part of it covered by hitherto unrecognized seas. The mist, having

form of rain and thoroughly and of the ground, f repeatedly ever since been earth has the Thus the process by which refreshed was instituted and the first requisite for the
risen, fell again in the

watered the whole face

existence of animal as well as vegetable life provided. When the ground had been made cultivable, Yah7.

weh, proceeding to his second task, formed man, moulded

him
*

as a potter fashions a vessel.^

The

material out of

verse,

Haupt (AOS, Proc., 1896, 158 ff.) renders the first half of the an irrigating canal overflowed the land; making TS nearly

edfi, the Assyrian for flood, and substituting bs? See also the versions. However, it seems over, for ]> from. clear that the IS not only goes up, but supplies the rain without See also Job to v. 5, there can be no vegetation. which,

the equivalent of

according

xxxvi. 27 f. t On the uses of the tenses in this verse, see .Ges.

107,

i, a,

and

2; 112, 3, a, o. J For a Babylonian parallel, see Jensen, Kosinologie, 292

R

ff.

II. ;,

8]

COMMENTS
;

123

which he formed him was dust from the ground from which he afterward formed the beasts and the birds (v. The man thus produced, however, was at first as 19).* It lifeless as the ground from which he had been taken. was only when Yahweh breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, the breath by which life manifests itself, The term living that he became a living creature.
creature occurs three times in the
21, 24).
first

chapter (vv. 20,

In these and other cases

exclusive of man.

Here

it

is

applied to animals, applied to him as an aniit is

mate being, the
he might
tures.
later

first

that ever existed, f

or implied with reference to any

Nothing is said endowments by which

be distinguished from other living creaCompare the corresponding passage in the first chapter (vv. 26 ff.), where the superiority of man is ex-

pressly taught.

The first account of man's creation represents him as immediately commissioned to subdue the earth and enjoy mastery over it according to this second he was at
;

first

treated

(b)

more tenderly, being placed The Garden in Edhen(vv. 8-17).
l

in
8.

The garden,
tract of

as appears in the course of the story,

was a

ground enclosed
kinds
(v.

(iii.

9)

;

in

and planted with trees of various other words, a park or orchard like
23)
;

those in which the ancient rulers of the Orient delighted. See Frd. Delitzsch, WLP, 95 ff. Ragozin, Assyria, 58.

Such a park was

called in Persian pairidaeza, whence,

through the Greek, the English Paradise. The garden of God, or Yahweh as it is sometimes called in other
y

*

The author seems
related to

to

man, as
\

n^1S

have intended to represent the word ground. Comp. Brown, Lex.

beast of the

In the Babylonian document last cited, also, field. See Schrader, KB, vi. i, 40 f.

man
;

precedes the

Ball,

LE,

19.

124

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[11.8,9
li.

parts of the Old Testament (Eze. xxviii. 13; Isa. was located in -Edhen. The 'Edhen here meant
that of

3),

is

not
12

Am.

i.

5

(Ehden
23

?),

nor that of
It

Isa.

xxxvii.

and Eze.

xxvii.

(Bit-adini).

almost every part of the globe. The of the name signifies delight in Ps. xxxvi. 9/8 has led to the suggestion that it is a poetical designation for a region with whose real

has been sought in fact that the Hebrew

name the author was not acquainted

(Dillmann). Another and a more plausible theory is that it is derived from the Assyrian edinu, meaning field, which was sometimes used of the plain of Babylonia (Frd.
Delitzsch,

WLP,

79

f.).

There

is

little

to

show where

the author of this verse located the region he had in What is said of the rivers that flowed from it is mind.
of doubtful value, since vv.

other hand.

It

is

10-14 are clearly from anhere described as eastward viz.,
;

from the standpoint

only passage that throws any real light on the subject is xi. 2, according to which 'Edhen must have been, not in

of the writer, Palestine.*

The

Babylonia

itself,

but in the Arabian desert

;

since the

sacred author there says that the people journeyed eastward to reach the plain of the land of Skin'ar. This
location

would harmonize with the

latter of

the two

theories with reference to the original signification of the name 'Edhen, the word edinu meaning desert as well as
plain.

See Schrader,
it

KA T,

ever

was,

Yahweh

26 f. In this garden, wherplaced the single man that he

had formed.
9.

At the same time he caused to spring from the
of the

ground
all

garden every tree pleasant to sight,
16,
18),

to beautify the place (Eze. xxxi. 8,

as well as

whose
all

fruit

is

good

for

human
iii.

food.

In addition

to

these ornamental and alimental trees, according to
*

On

the

word DlpQ, see

24;

xi.

2;

xiii.

u.

1 1.

9] text,

COMMENTS
there were in the
others.
is

125

the present

den two The tree

One

of these

middle of the garwas the tree of life.
its fruit

evidently so called to denote that

possessed the property of preventing the decay and dissolution of the human body. This appears from iii. 22,

where Yahweh
that the
tree,
first

represented as using language implying pair might, by means of the fruit of this
is

clear

have prolonged their lives indefinitely. It is not whether they could have done so by eating of it

but once, or only by resorting to it from time to time, as they felt the need of its rejuvenating potency. The fact that no reference is made to any attempt on their part to

ensure their immortality by partaking of it, after their disobedience and before their expulsion from the garden,
indicates that they could not thus have forestalled their' Creator in other words, that the fruit of this wonderful
:

was intended to heal actual wounds and cure inThe reason why they had not partaken cipient diseases. of it, when they were expelled, therefore, is not that they knew nothing about it (Delitzsch), but that they had thus far had no occasion to test its efficacy. See Prv.
tree
iii.

18;

xi.

30;

xiii.

12; xv. 4

;

comp. Eze.

xlvii.

12; Rev.

Such were the nature and the function of the tree of life, so far as they can be learned from the references to it in this and the following chapter. It is very
xxii. 2.

doubtful, however,
of the story in

if

this tree
it

which
idea

now appears
it

had a place in the original and for several
;

represents does not harmonize with the teaching of the story as a whole ac:

reasons

(/)

The

which
life

;

cording to which man's

Yahweh
the
is

(v. 7),

directly by and remained immediately dependent on
;

was given

to

him

will of the Creator (iii. 19 see also Ps. civ. 29). (2) It completely ignored throughout almost the entire story. Thus, not only is there no reference to it in v. 17, but in

126
iii.

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[II.

9

3 the language employed implies that there was only one tree in the middle of the garden, (j) The references to it have the marks of interpolations. Thus, in the verse under consideration, it obscures the author's meaning,* and iii. 22 and 24 evidently constitute a doublet to v. 23. These considerations seem to warrant one in concluding that the tree of life was wanting in the original story, and in restoring the text,
if

necessary, in
of
life

harmony with

this

being removed, there remains but one tree in the middle of the garden, the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The nature of
conclusion, j-

The

tree

this tree, also, is indicated

by

its

name.

It

was a tree

that possessed the property of imparting to those did not have it the faculty of knowing good and evil.

who The

meaning
disputed.

of the

terms good and evil in this connection is Wellhausen (GI, 314) insists that the author

here refers, not to a distinction in the moral quality of voluntary actions, but to a classification of things as helpful or harmful in other words, that the knowledge
;

of

good and

evil is

only another
ff.)

name

for culture, civiliza-

objects (/) that, granting that these terms originally had a purely utilitarian signification, when the Yahwistic narrative was written, they had
tion.

Budde (BU, 65

evidently acquired a moral

application

(Am.

v.

14

f.)

which

finally appears in expressions similar to, or identical

* The original author would certainly have introduced it after the phrase in the middle of the garden, and thus have made clear where the second tree was located.
f The required changes, which will be introduced in the proper connections, are the following In gb, for the present text, read and, in the middle of the garden, the tree of knowledge ofgood and
:

evil; in i;a, for knowledge ofgood and evil, read, as in iii. 3, that For an is in the middle of the garden; and omit iii. 22 and 24.

exhaustive discussion of the text, see Budde,

BU, 46

ff.

;

comp.

Bacon, GG, 104.

II. 9, 10]

COMMENTS

127

and

with, the one in question (2 Sam. xiv. 17; I Kgs. iii. 9) ; to (2) that, in the story of the Fall, the application
is

moral qualities

proven by the

fact, that

the

first

know-

ledge actually acquired by the first pair was that of their still more convincing consideration own nakedness.

A

is

of (j) that, in the threat attached to the prohibition

the tree in question, the capacity to distinguish between things advantageous and disadvantageous is taken for What would have been the use of the declaragranted.
thou shall die (v. 17), if he to whom the words were addressed had no notion of the desirable as distinguished from the undesirable? The question, how the knowledge thus described was imparted is easily answered. It
tion,

resided in the fruit of the tree

;

at

any

rate,

it

could be

acquired by eating the fruit (iii. 7), and there is nothing to indicate that, to the mind of the author, it could be

The theory that, if the first acquired in any other way. eaten of the not forbidden had fruit, the tree would pair
have had any influence upon their moral condition (Delitzsch) is as gratuitous as to suppose that they could have satisfied their hunger by sitting in the shadow of
the other trees of the garden.
10.

The

story of creation

is

here interrupted by a

No parenthetical description of a remarkable river. name is given to it. It is introduced by the simple statement that it went forth, in a continuous flow, from
'Edhen,
stream
or, rather,

an unknown point
is

in the region

thus

designated.
;

No

reference

made

to the creation of this

but the author describes it as watering the garden, and he evidently thought of it as provided for that purpose. As it issued from the garden it branched and became four sources, or the source of four divergIt must therefore have been comparatively ing streams.
large.

128
ii.

THE WORLD BEFORE 'ABRAHAM
The
first

[II.

n

of the streams to

which the

river of

'Edhen gave
reference to

rise is called

Fishon.

The

opinions with

its identity are numerous and conflicting. which still is a favorite in some quarters, is that the author had in mind one of the rivers of India

The

earliest,

:

e. g.,

the Ganges (Josephus) or the Indus (Dillmann). Others seek it near the head-waters of the Tigris and the

Euphrates, and find it in the Phasis (Brugsch), the Kyros Finally, those who (Keil), or the Araxes (von Raumer).
tify the

'Edhen in southern Babylonia idenPishon with one of the mouths of the Shatt elArab (Calvin), the Karun (Pressel), or a canal fed by the Euphrates. The last is the view maintained by Frd. Delitzsch ( WLP, 45 ff.), who identifies it with a canal, the
locate the garden of

Pallakopas, which left the Euphrates below Babylon, and,
after flowing through the Chaldean lakes and past the ancient city of 'Ur, emptied into the Persian Gulf some

distance southwest of the
still

mouth

of the

main stream, and

farther from that of the Tigris, which at that time entered the Gulf by a separate channel. Before attemptif any, of these views is correct, it to locate the land of Hawilah,* of which necessary the Pishon is said to have formed a boundary. The

ing to decide which,
is

name
1

8

;

i

Sam.

xxv. x. 7, 29 occurs seven times (Gen. ii. 1 1 xv. 7 ; I Chr. i. 9, 23) in the Old Testament.
;

;

In xxv. 1 8 it is given to the eastern limit of the territory occupied by the descendants of Ishmael, and, therefore, as Frd. Delitzsch (WLP, 58) contends, must have been in the vicinity of the upper end of the Persian Gulf. So,
also, in

In Gen. i Sam. xv. 7. Kush, or a Hamite tribe, while

x.

in v.

7 Hawilah is a son of 29 the same name is

given to a son of Yoktan, the second son of 'Ebher, from whom the Hebrews also were descended. It is not
* For

nVinn

read

nVnn

with the Samaritans.

II. ii, 12]

COMMENTS
in

129

necessary,

this

Hawilah of the

latter

connection, to decide whether the passage is the same as that of the

former, or a different tribe or country ; or, if they are the same, whether they are identically located. It is
clear that chapter x. is a compilation, that vv. 7 and 29 are by different authors, and that, since the latter only is from the same document as the second account of

and therefore at least possibly by the same alone can be given any weight in determining where the author of ii. 10-14 located Hawilah. But
creation,
it

hand,

the sons of Yoktan, so far as their identity can be disHence the covered, were tribes or regions of Arabia.
probability is that Hawilah also, according to the author Glaser (SGA, of x. 29, was somewhere in that country. undertaken to not has ii. 341 show, ff.) only that this

interpretation

is

correct, but that the Pishon

was

Wady

ed-Dawasir, one of the two great central wadies of the Arabian peninsula, a branch of which was formerly

Wady Faisan. See also Hommel, AHT, 313 ff. however, as seems probable, the Mesha of x. 30 is the Mash of the Assyrian inscriptions (Frd. Delitzsch, WLP, 242 f.), i. e., the great Syro-Arabian desert, or the northwestern part of it, Delitzsch's view, that the Pishon was
called
If,

a branch of the Euphrates, seems preferable. That this region produced gold appears from the fact that among
the things brought as tribute to Tiglath-pileser III. by the king of Bjt-yakin was " gold, the dust of his land."

See Schrader, KB,
12.

ii.

14

f.

Of the gold of that* land the author says that it was very f good. Two other products of Hawilah are men*

On

the form

Sin

see Ges.

32,

R

6.

The Samaritans read

f

This

is

Pentateuch.

the reading of the Vulgate, as well as of the Samaritan The Massoretic text seems to have lost the adverb.

130

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
The word
for the first has

[II. 12, 13

tioned.

sometimes been ren-

dered pearl (Bochart). The common opinion is that it is the name for bdellium, a transparent, aromatic gum, yellow in color, which, according to Pliny (HN, xii. 35), was found in Arabia, as well as in India, Media, and Babylonia. See Frd. Delitzsch, WLP, 16 Enc. Bib., art.
;

Bdellium
is

;

comp. Die. Bib.

The

third thing

mentioned

a precious stone (Job xxviii. 16), found among the ornaments of the high priest's ephod (Ex. xxviii. 9, 20).
It is

supposed to be the same with the Assyrian samtu,
province of

the principal product of the Babylonian

There are (Frd. Delitzsch, WLP, 60, 131). various opinions respecting its precise nature, but the oriental authorities identify it with the beryl, and this

Meluha

view

is

favored by

many modern
Gihon,

exegetes.

See Enc.

Bib., art. Beryl.
13.

The

identity of the

also,

the second of the

four streams into which the river of 'Edhen branched, is The ancients identified it with the Nile (Josedisputed.
phus), and their opinion in
its

various modifications

still

has

its

adherents (Dillmann).

(Rosenmiiller), which

Others prefer the Oxus among Mohammedans has some-

name Jeihun. Those who locate Paraidentify the Gihon with the Araxes (Brugsch), while those who find it in Babylonia prefer one of the mouths of the Shatt el-Arab (Calvin), the
times received the
dise in

Armenia

Kercha

(Pressel), or a canal in that region.
it

According

to Frd. Delitzsch

was the Shatt

en-Nil, a canal that

left the Euphrates at Babylon, one of the branches of which emptied into the Tigris, while the other, after passing the ancient cities of Nippur and Uruk, finally reentered the Euphrates not far from 'Ur (WLP, 70 f.), Glaser (SGA, ii. 354 f.) identifies it with wady er-Rumma, Here, again, the formerly Jaihan, in Northern Arabia.

II. is]

COMMENTS

131

author comes to the assistance of the reader by describing the river meant as the one that boundeth the whole land of Kush. Now Kush, in the Old Testa-

ment, usually denotes the country south of Egypt, the Ethiopia of classical geography, or some part of it, and this is the interpretation that has always been given to In x. 8 ff., however, it cannot be so interit in x. 6 f.
preted, but

must
cities

at least include a part of Babylonia,
;

mentioned in v. 10 were situated and that passage, being of Yahwistic origin, doubtless indiIt is probable, cates what is meant in this connection.

where the

Kush is here the name of a part, perhaps the whole, of Babylonia* This being the case, it is further probable, that the name is but another form of the Assyrian Kash, a designation for a people whose earliest
therefore, that

known home was on
syria proper

and 'Elam,t but who

the border of Media, between Asfinally overran both

a period of at least four

latter of which they ruled for hundred years. \ The river in question, therefore, must have been a branch of the Euphrates that bounded one of these regions and the only known stream that fulfils these conditions seems to be the ancient canal identified with the Arahtu of the

'Elam and Babylonia, the

;

* The Greek Version here has Ethiopia, but in chapter
transliteration.

x.

a

WLP, 32. See also McCurdy, HPM,\. 142 ff. (Die. Bib., art. Babylonia) thinks that the Kasshites of Babylonia came from 'Elam, Kash being an ancient name for the
f Frd. Delitzsch,

Hommel

latter country.

This was the duration of the Kasshite supremacy according to vi. 2645.), who fixes its limits at 1579 and 1180 B. c. See also Hommel Die. Bib., art. Babylonia. According to Frd. Delitzsch (Miirdter-Delitzsch, GBA, Appendix) it was considerably and according to Meyer (GA, i. 329) 1726-1 150 B. c., greater, 1502-1257 B. c. considerably less,
J

Peiser (ZA,

132

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[II. 13, 14

Assyrian inscriptions and the more modern Shatt en-Nil, whose pre-Shemitic name, according to Frd. Delitzsch
(

WLP,
14.
is

The name

This

was Kahanna or Guhanna.* of the third river is HiddekeL the Hebrew form of Idiklat> the name by which
75
f.),

the Assyrians called the Tigris. It is described as flowIf by 'Asshur were meant the city ing east of 'Asshur. of that name, the earliest capital of Assyria, the state-

ment would be perfectly correct, for it lay on the west bank of the Tigris, on the site of the modern village of Kalah Shergat. Since, however, the rivers heretofore
mentioned were described
tries that

in their relation to the coun-

they bounded,

it is

this instance also the country,
is

more than probable that in and not the city, 'Asshur

This being the case, the author seems to be Assyria lay on both sides of. the Tigris, and the great cities, Kalah, Nineweh, and Dur-sharruken,
intended.
at fault, since

Still, the Tigris did flow east of the further part of the Assyrian empire. difficulty arises from the fact that the Tigris is here represented as a branch of the same great stream as the

were east of
better

it.f

known

A

fourth river, the Perath, i. e., the Euphrates. This, for, although also, taken in a strict sense is incorrect the two rise not far from each other, and flow only a few miles apart for some distance below the site of Sippara, they unite only after they have passed beyond the ancient limits of the Persian Gulf, which they once entered by
;

*

How

it

came

to be called the Nile is

unknown.

See Frd.

70 f. f Dillmann and others prefer to translate ntt"fp> in front of; but this rendering is not supported by any of the other passages in
Delitzsch,

WLP,

which the word is used (iv. 16; i Sam. xiii. 5; Eze. xxxix. 11). Moreover, it is no improvement; since a river that flows through a country can with no greater propriety be said to flow in front of,
than east of'it.

II. 14, IS]

COMMENTS

133

The separate channels (Frd. Delitzsch, WLP, 173 ff.). in early times was that them between connection only made by canals such as the left branch of the Shatt enNil already mentioned.
It

seems necessary, therefore,

to conclude, either that the author of vv. 10-14 lacked exact knowledge of Babylonia and its great rivers, or that

he intended to represent the Tigris

as,

through the canal

or canals connecting it with the 'Euphrates, a branch of the latter. The second of these suppositions is the more
probable. The idea that the river flowing forth from 'Edhen was It has the sancthe Euphrates is by no means modern.
tion of the

Talmud and other Jewish
to

authorities (Frd.

river of

143 f.). According Tosaphoth "the to divide before it into four Paradise, begins When it divides, the others sources, is the Euphrates. branch from it on either side, but it flows straight onward
Delitzsch,

WLP,

and forms

in its course the fourth." *

If this

was the

idea of the author of these verses, he cannot have located

the garden in Arabia, but must have identified it with the country about Babylon, a region which was called, in the language of its non-Shemitic inhabitants, Karduniash, "the garden of the
Delitzsch,

Lord
ff.
;

of the lands."

(Frd.
i.

WLP,
;

64

ff.,

133

124

f.,

133

comp. Die. Bib.,

art.

McCurdy, HPM, Eden; Jensen, Kosmo-

logie,
15.

507

ff.)

river by which the garden was watered, the author of the description finds it necesHe sary to repeat somewhat to restore the connection. states once more, what has already been narrated of the man in v. 8, that Yahweh placed him in the garden.

Having described the

*

The Babylonians
first

represented the Tigris and the Euphrates

as the

rivers created.

See Schrader,

KB,

vi. i,

40

f.

;

Ball,

LE,

19.

134

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[II.

15-17

He, however, describes the place, not as the garden in, but as the garden of 'Edhen. He also states expressly that, as is implied in the connection of v. 8 with v. 5, the

man was

placed ih the garden to

till it.

He adds a touch
;

that hardly harmonizes with the original story, when he says that another object was, that he might guard it
for as yet

he

is

the only living creature in existence, and

the animals, when created, are to be his companions, and not his enemies.* Comp. Jub. iii. 13. i6f. The original story now proceeds with the state-

ment

Yahweh, having created the trees as described charged the man with reference to them. The expression all the trees of the garden, of course, means
that
in v. 9,
all

those described in
is

v.

9 as good for food ; or

all

but

one, for one

describes

it

The present text expressly excepted. as the tree of knowledge of good and
:

for, (/) there being evil, but this can hardly be correct but one magical tree, it is more natural that it should be described by its location than by its properties (2) it is
;

so described in
that the
first

iii.

3

;

(j) the

language of

iii.

4

f.

implies
;

pair

were ignorant

of its peculiar properties

and (f) the nature of the story requires that they should be so represented. See iii 10 f.f Yahweh, therefore, must have forbidden the first man to eat of the fruit of
the tree in the middle of the garden, without informing him what its effect would be and thus suggesting an in-

ducement to disobedience. The reason for the prohibition has generally been overlooked. One suggestion is, that possibly it was only a temporary regulation that perhaps
;

* Note also that the word p garden, is here feminine, but elsewhere (i Kgs. xxi. 2; Isa. Iviii. II Jer. xxxi. 12; Cnt. iv. 12, 16)
;

masculine.
f

The change

in the text

was made, and required, on account of
life in v. 9.

the introduction of the tree of

II. 17]

COMMENTS
if

135

Yahweh would
the
tree,

finally have permitted man to partake of he had remained obedient, and secured 'him

against evil

consequences (Budde,

B U,

72).

The

favorite

opinion, however, is that, had the temptation been resisted, the result would have been the development in man, thus

voluntarily choosing good, of a knowledge of the distinction between it and its opposite (Dillmann). Both of

these views are clearly mistaken. The author evidently means to teach that man, when created, lacked the power to make for himself moral distinctions, and that Yahweh,
-

although he made disappointment possible, intended that he should remain in this childlike condition (Piepen193 f.). To the further question, why Yahunwilling that man should possess the knowledge of good and evil, also, there have been various answers. It is not clear that this author thought of the Creator as
bring,

TO T,

weh was

moved by

Neither iii. 5, where jealousy in the matter. the serpent is the speaker, nor iii. 22, which is by another hand, can be cited in support of such a supposition.

On the other hand, in view of xi. 6, it is hardly safe to say that he wished to represent the Deity as acting from It is more probable that, in purely benevolent motives.
his mind, the ideal,

and therefore the

original, relation of

man
the

to

God was one
denying
evil,

latter, in

of absolute dependence, and that to the former the knowledge of

was at the same time asserting his prerogative as Creator and attempting to safeguard the interests of his creature.* The prohibition was accomgood and
this

panied by a solemn warning. The words with which is introduced, in the day thou eatest from it,

might mean that the penalty threatened would immediately follow the offence (Gunkel), but the sequel shows
*

On

the jealousy attributed to their gods

Lenormant,

BH

by other peoples, see

t

104

ff.

136

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[II.

17-19

eatest thereof ; so that the

that they are to be interpreted as equivalent to if thou whole clause might be freely

rendered, So surely as thou eatest thereof die, the emphasis being not on the date, so

thou shalt

much

as on

the certainty, of the infliction. The serpent, in iii. 4, makes the ambiguity of this statement an excuse for a
falsehood.

The natural question, how long the first man remained the solitary inhabitant of the earth, is left unanswered. The author can hardly have thought it a great length of
time, for he proceeds at once to describe

The Advent of (c) account of her creation,
which Yahweh
feeling his
is

Woman
is

(vv.

18-25).

18.

The

introduced by a confession in

the

man

to

way be alone.

in his work.

naYvely represented as, so to speak, He says, It is not good for

Compare the

satisfaction with

which, in the first chapter, God is described as regarding the successive results of his creative activity, and the very good with which he finally characterizes the whole. On discovering that the provisions made for his creature
are inadequate,

YaHweh

He
is

says, I will

make * him

resolves to supply the deficiency. a helper, a sharer in his

This helper simple duties and their abundant rewards. to be one suited to him. Not his like, it would

have been a simple matter to have duplicated him, but a second of his species in whom he will find himself
complete.
19.

In pursuance of his purpose

Yahweh further f

* The Greek and the Latin Version have Let us make. t The word rendered further (T^), which, though not in the Massoretic text, is found in the Samaritan Pentateuch, and its equivalent in the Greek Version, beyond doubt forbids a rendering of the verb by which it is made to appear that here, as in chapter i.,

11.19,20]

COMMENTS

.

137

formed from the ground, just as he had the man, three * classes of animals. The text does not say here, as in the
case of the man, that life was imparted to the lifeless clay by the breath of Yahweh, but this was undoubtedly the
author's idea.

See

Ps. civ. 29.

The

fish of

the sea are

ignored or overlooked, as in i. 30. The newly created animals Yahweh brought to the man to see what he

would

call

them; gave him an
and put
first

opportunity to note

their characteristics

his ideas of

them
is

into appro-

priate names.

In the

account

it

God

himself

who
into

names to his creatures as they are brought Note that the man, even before he had existence.
gives

a companion, according to the author, had a perfect command of the original language of the race. The result
was, that

whatsoever the
still

man

called each,

lit.,

zV,t

that was, became and

remains, its

name.f

20. One after another all the cattle, all the birds of heaven, and all the beasts of the field, the last being the so-called wild animals (comp. v. 9), passed in As he gave them their procession before the man.

names he sought among them the companion he needed, the Creator hadformed the animals before man existed. Comp.
Murphy.

/Tn b3

* The item all the cattle is to be Before supplied from v. 20. insert also, with the Samaritans, HS, the sign of the ac-

cusative.
t The phrase a living creature, which follows in the Massoretic text, is without doubt a gloss introduced to prevent the possibility

of a mistake with reference to the antecedent of the pronominal
suffix.

\ The Hebrew idea of the relation of names to the persons or things designated thereby is illustrated in the identification by them of the divine name with the Deity himself. See Isa. xxix. 23; 1. 10;
also Piepenbring,

TOT,

141

f.

which is wanting plied from the Greek Version.
all,

The word

in the Massoretic text, is sup-

138

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
;

[II.

19-22

but in vain for himself the man, lit. found not a helper suited to him.

* for the

man

21. The Creator, finding that none of the creatures he had produced from the ground was satisfactory, determined upon the use of a different material for the desired In pursuance of his plan he threw the man into helper. a stupor, and, when the latter fell asleep, removed one of his ribs about the only bone that could be removed without mutilating the body.J In its place he put
;

flesh.
22.

This

rib

Yahweh fashioned,

lit.

built,

||

into a

iii. 17 and 21, omit the and the following chapter, wherever the definiteness or indefiniteness of the noun can be determined from the consonantal text, the article is used, it is more than probable

* The Massoretes, not only here, but in
;

article

but, since in this

that in these cases the proper reading

is

not DTWfo/fcr
i. <?.,

'Adham, or
first

for a
f

man (Delitzsch), but D"TSb,/0r the man, Two other renderings have been suggested
was
;

the

man.

:

one found not, or

there

not found, as in the Greek and (Revised) English verand he (Yahweh) found not (Dillmann). Both of them, however, require a change of subject which is awkward and improbOlshausen suggests the reading aiSHI for Disb> able.
sions
\

The word
it is

3?b! also

means

side.

In

fact, this is the

sense in

most frequently found. See Ex. xxv. 12, 14, etc. Hence some have insisted on rendering it so in this connection. See Ber. Rab. 75 f. also Lenormant (BH, 60 ff.), who cites Persian and Indian
which
;

legends in support of his interpretation. This, however, cannot have been the thought of the author, since he would not have represented the
It
first being created as wanting what he already possessed. should also be noted, that the Assyrian equivalent of 37^^' silu,

means

rib as well as side.
lit.

On nannn
||

under

it,

see Ges.

103,

i,

R 3.

The Samari-

tans have the regular form rPfiPTfV There is a peculiar fitness in the use of n33> build, in this connection, arising from the fact that 3?bs is sometimes found in the

sense of board.

See

i

Kgs.

vi. 15.

II.

22-24]

COMMENTS
to the man, to see
if

139

woman, and brought her
would recognize
in

he

her the needed companion. 23. Yahweh must at the same time have explained the origin of the woman. The language in which the

man welcomed

her implies such an explanation

:

This,

now, unlike all the previous products of the divine skill, lit. bone is one of my bones and a part of my flesh of my bones and flesh of my flesh-; part and parcel of He at once proceeds to name her, as he had myself. He previously named the animals presented to him.
;

calls

her

her, that

woman, and gives as a reason for so naming she was taken* from herf man, her hus-

band. J
24. Therefore, because the first wife was literally, The according to this account, a part of her husband. words that follow are probably the words of the first

not, like x. Qb, an explanation interjected by the narrator (Dillmann). Comp. Mat. xix. 5. Hence they are to be rendered shall, and not doth a man leave his

man,

and his mother, loose to a greater or less extent the ties by which he is bound to them, and cleave, as to no other, to his wife. See Ps. xlv. n/io. Thus the
father

two

are to

become one

flesh, their

aims and interests

thenceforth being identical. This verse, taken in connection with iii. 1 6, indicates that the author regarded
*
f

On

the form
is

nn^

see Ges.

52, i,

R.
;

the Greek and the Samaritan reading text omits the pronominal suffix.
J

This

the Massoretic

The

writer seems to have derived the

nt7S> from ttTS*

man; and

this

Hebrew word for woman, was formerly supposed to be the
;

correct derivation.

See, however, Brown, Lex. 35b

Frd. Delitzsch,

HA,

9.

This is the Greek, the Syriac, and the Vulgate reading. Massoretic text omits D7T3tt; they two; the Samaritan has
DrP32?J2>

The

and there

shall be from the two of them.

140

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[II. 24, 25

lation

the equality of the husband and the wife as the ideal rebetween them, but it does not so clearly as some

have supposed (Dillmann) imply that he disapproved of polygamy. See iv. 19. 25. The account closes with a statement in harmony
with the conception, evidently cherished by the author, that the first representatives of the human race were
as immature,

and therefore as irresponsible, as

children.
;

Though they were both naked,* they felt no shame saw no more harm in exposing their persons to each other
than as
if

they had been infants.

In the course of the comments on this second account

been laid upon the variabetween it and the first to show that the two cannot be the work of the same author. They diverge, as
of creation sufficient stress has

tions

generally conceded, both in style and, in large measure, in content. There is, however, a fundamental
is

now

unity between them. They both, so far as they go, trace the origin of all things to the will of an intelligent Creator; and they both make man the chief of God's
creatures and the lord of the earth and everything in it. The difference between them, so far as these fundamenis merely a difference in the degree which the common ideas are conceived and taught. When the second account was written, they were rather implied than expressed by the time the first appeared they had become recognized doctrines of the

tals are

concerned,

of clearness with

;

Jewish church.
condition and surroundings of the first pair, according to the Yah wist, were perfect. The garden yielded
all

The

that they needed to satisfy their physical wants.
*

The

On D^TTO*

naked, see Ges.

9, (2)

R.

III. i]

COMMENTS

141

exertion required of them was enough to give zest to existence, but too little to be called labor. They lived
at

peace with the animals, one and
other.

all,

and

in delightful

communion with each

How

long this

state of

He seems to things lasted, the author does not say.* have meant to give the impression that no great length
of time elapsed before at once to describe
b.
it

was disturbed

;

for

he proceeds

The Origin

of Evil

(iii.).

explains the existence of physical suffering and death as the penalty for
(i)

He

THE FIRST DISOBEDIENCE

(vv. 1-7).

I.

The

pre-

sence of the tree of knowledge of good and evil in the garden, in view of its attractiveness, was in itself a temptation. The force of This, however, was not sufficient. the divine prohibition, which would naturally operate to

This

prevent disobedience, must in some way be neutralized. is accomplished through the intervention of the
serpent. The question, Who, or what, was the serpent, has been variously answered. It has been interpreted as an allegorical figure. Thus, Reuss (A T, iii. 206 f.) makes

a personification of the instinct that impels man to emerge from the condition of childhood, while Schultz
it

272 ff.) holds that it symbolizes the animal prinmankind. The objection to the first of these views is, that it neither attempts nor permits an explanation of the curse pronounced upon the serpent. The second is still less satisfactory for (/) the author of the story evidently did not distinguish between two or more

(OTT,

ii.

ciple in

;

species of

life in

man, but thought of
spirit

it

a manifestation of the

of

Yahweh
(iii.

in its entirety as in the human

form
*

(ii.

7

;

vi. 3)

;

(2)

on the supposition that he made
12) it

According to the Book of Jubilees

was seven

years.

142

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
a distinction,

[III.

i

the serpent could not symbolize the life, since, although the woman herself notes the beauty of the tree and the attractiveness of its fruit,

such

animal

the serpent takes no account of these things, but presents the higher advantages to be obtained by partaking and (j) this view renders the author's stateof it (iii. 5)
;

ment concerning the penalties
unintelligible.

inflicted
is

confusing and

A favorite theory
Satan.
f.
;

a
of

mask
;

for

It

is

that the serpent was at least as old as the book
;

xx. 2

Rom. xvi. 20 Rev. xii. 9 (ii. 23 but comp. 2 Cor. xi. 3). Some modern exegetes are strenuous in their insistence upon (Delitzsch) very
see also
;
;

Wisdom

in the

it cannot be maintained. (/) There is nowhere language used any evidence that a concealed personality was in the mind of the writer. (2) Granted that the serpent was a mask for another being, there would still be the best of ground for denying that this hypoit

but

thetical being

was Satan

:

for (a) the doctrine of Satan

as an evil power opposed to the Deity is considerably later than the date of the origin of this story (comp. 2 Sam. xxiv. I and I Chr. xxi. i) and (b) the introduc;

tion of a positively evil being would have forestalled the very object of the story, to explain the origin of evil in

the world,
cal,

(j)

This interpretation,

also, like

the allegori-

breaks

down when
;

the serpent and the power of which

applied to the penalty inflicted on for, either (a) the serpent alone is punished
it

was the

Satan

is

condemned

to a degradation

tool overlooked, or (b) which hardly har-

monizes with his subsequent position as a son of God and a member of the heavenly court. See Job 6. If, now, the serpent is neither a figure of thought nor a mask for Satan, the presumption is that it is to be understood as a real animal. That this is the correct interpretation appears from the following considerations (/) It
i. :

III. I]
is

COMMENTS
among
or,

143
field,
i.

distinctly classified
(ii.

the beasts of the

e. t

the animals
wild animals

19),

strictly speaking, the so-called

(ii.

20).

(2) It is

described by a mark, cun-

ning, that belongs, or has always been popularly supposed See Mat. x. 16. (j) The to belong, to actual serpents. the author introduction of a tempter of the required object

without moral responsibility. (4} The penalty inflicted upon the serpent (v. 14) exactly fits the animal of that

name and corresponds to those inflicted upon the man and the woman. To the objection that it is ridiculous to suppose the serpent ever to have had the power of speech or any other form than it now wears, it is sufficient to reply that the question now is, not what were the original form and capacities of this animal, but how the author of the story conceived of it. The early Jews had no difficulty with the literal interpretation. They seem to have believed that all the animals had the power of speech (Jub. iii. 24), and that the serpent went erect on two feet (Ber. Rab.}. The animal, if it was an animal, is described as most * cunning of all the beasts of the field. The epithet cunning does not imply moral obliquity, but denotes simply that this animal had to a larger degree than any
also to the fox.
its

other the kind of intelligence that is popularly attributed See Lu. xiii. 32. The serpent exemplifies
character by the
;

way

in

which

it

approaches the wo-

man coming

to her, apparently,

alone and saying, f name for the Deity.

when she happens to be Hath God, then, said? Note the The form of address is half-exclamacan hardly believe what
it is

tory, as if the serpent * The construction bD

about

though comparative in form, is superlative in signification, and should be so rendered in English. See Deu. vii. 7, etc. Konig, SHS, 309, d fin the Massoretic text the subject of the verb "IDS* said, has to be supplied from the connection. A better reading is that of the Greek and Syriac versions, in which the serpent is expressed. So
;

Ball.

144

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[III. 1-4

to put into the mouth of God. Its version of the divine a injunction is calculated to excite astonishment,

being

reckless and incredible perversion of the original utterYahweh had forbidden one tree the serpent preance.
;

tends to have learned that he has forbidden all of them. Ye shall not eat of any * tree of the garden, is its

way
2.

of putting

it.

Comp. Murphy.
reply

The woman's
first

In the

is interesting in several respects. clause she denies the serpent's statement,

reproducing, with unimportant variations, ii. i6b.f 3. As she proceeds, she diverges from the phraseology of ii 17. The tree whose fruit is forbidden is designated,

not by the name given to it in ii. 9 and 17, but, as it should be on the supposition that it was the only one there, by its location, as this J tree that is in the mid-

dle of the garden.

From

the fruit of this tree the

woman

explains that she and her husband have been forbidden to eat on pain of death but she enlarges upon the original injunction as reported in ii. 16 f. by the inser;

an additional clause. This clause can hardly be a thoughtless variation. It was doubtless intended to indition of

cate the

first

effect
It

upon the woman

of

the serpent's

has given rise to a sense of injury, to justify which she converts what was at most an implication of the original charge into an express prohibition,
insinuation.

nor shall ye touch

it

lest

ye

die.

4. This reference to Yahweh's threat furnished the serpent a second opportunity for the exhibition of its cun-

*

On

the force of

ho

with the negative, see Ex. xx. 10; Ges.

152, t

i, a.

all, which is wanting in the Massoretic be supplied from the Greek and Syriac versions, both of which, however, omit ^1C fruit. % The Samaritan reading; the Massoretic has the. On the form ]inDn see Ges. 47, 3, R 4.

The word 72 here

text, is to

1 1 1.

4-6]

COMMENTS

145

ning.

from

ii. 17 Yahweh had said, In the day thou eatest thou shalt surely die. The woman seems to have understood these words as meaning that death would be

In

it

fruit.

the direct and immediate effect of eating of the forbidden This, as the sequel shows, was a mistaken inter;

pretation
reply,

Ye will

yet the serpent adopted it, thus making its not * surely die, at the same time strictly

correct and utterly misleading, since the natural inference would now be, that disobedience of the divine command would have no evil consequences. 5. Having thus artfully disposed of the woman's fears, the serpent proceeds to inform her what are the real

At the same time it properties of the tree in question. takes pains to increase the distrust of Yahweh awakened
by
its
first

utterance.

The words with which

it

intro-

duces

statement imply, not only, as v. 3 would lead one to suspect, that both the man and his wife had
its

hitherto been ignorant of the nature of the tree, but that

God had purposely kept them in ignorance of it, and from a sinister motive. God knoweth, it says, that in the day ye eat from it your eyes will be opened. What is meant by the opening of their eyes is at once
be like God, not gods (Spurrell), and evil which could not but seem to knowing good the woman highly advantageous. 6. The tree, thus skilfully commended, now became very attractive. The woman saw, first, that it, or its
explained
:

Ye

will

;

was apparently good, fit, for food. This she seems not hitherto to have noticed much less that it was a
fruit,
;

delight to the eyes, looking as if it would be, not only nutritious, but delicious. Finally, she was convinced that
* On the position of the negative, see Ges. 113, 3, R 3, where, " however, the parenthetical clause should read, where the object is the denial verbatim of the threat uttered in ii. 17."

146

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[III.

6

it was desirable, because, as the serpent had expressly, and correctly, told her, the effect of eating from it was to make one wise, to communicate a knowledge hitherto denied. Comp. Delitzsch.* The last was the determin-

The desire to become like God, a present the fear of his displeasure, a future, overcame advantage, and now at the most only a possible disadvantage and, approaching the tree, she took from its fruit and ate. Then she gave also to her husband. It is not clear
ing factor.
;

that the author thought of the woman as giving the fruit to her husband with the idea of dividing the responsibility of transgressing the divine command (Dillmann).

The
ing

serpent had, as she understood it, assured her that there was no danger, and she herself had learned by testthat the fruit did not, as she had supposed it would, produce harmful physical effects. It is therefore more
it

natural to suppose that she acted upon an impulse to share with her husband the good that she had coveted.

The phrase with her
that he

is

usually understood as

meaning
to the

was present when she
This, in

finally yielded

view of the fact that he has no place tempter. or part in the scene between his wife and the serpent, can hardly be correct. If, therefore, the present text is
retained, these words must be interpreted as equivalent to as well, denoting that, when she found him, or he her, she gave him his share of the fruit that she had plucked,!

and he ate. if This view of the matter is supported by the fact that, according to vv. 12 and 17, the woman alone is accused of tempting her husband.
* If the rendering preferred by Delitzsch, lovely to behold, be adopted, one can hardly avoid the conclusion of Gunkel, that this last phrase is a gloss to the one preceding.
f The Arabic Version obtains a more intelligible reading by placing this phrase at the end of the verse. So Ball. \ The Greek and Samaritan reading has the plural, they ate.

III. 7]

COMMENTS
were opened,
i.

147
;

7. The result was just what the eyes of both of them acquired the coveted power to between good and evil. This

the serpent had predicted
e. t

they distinguish for themselves power at once manifested

itself

in

naked.

The

the recognition of the fact that they were consciousness of their condition produced
identified with

an emotion which has usually been

shame

in the sense of guilty confusion (Dillmann). It is doubtful if this was the author's meaning. His idea seems to

have been that the pair were at first so preoccupied with the operation of the new faculty that they felt no condemnation for the act by which they had acquired it. The

emotion produced by the consciousness of their nakedness, therefore, must have been the natural disturbance at being discovered naked which is perfectly consistent
with innocence.
and, in
It prompted them to clothe themselves, obedience to this normal impulse, they sewed

together fig-leaves and made themselves aprons. The smallness and irregularity of the leaves of ihsficus carica do not warrant one in supposing that the tree here meant was one of another species e. g., the banana
;

(Delitzsch).

The

fig

probably has

its

place in the story

because the author,

who thereby perhaps betrays his Palestinian origin (Dillmann), thought of it as the tree with which, through their use of its fruit for food, the man and his wife were best acquainted.* The suggestion of

Budde (BU, 69

f.),

that the use of fig-leaves for
is

the purpose described betrays their helplessness,
attractive.

less

If,

as has been suggested, the offending pair, at

first,

being preoccupied with the
* of

new

faculty and

its

operation,

According to some Jewish authorities the good and evil was the fig. See Weber, PT,

tree of
212.

knowledge

148

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
Yahweh and
his warning, they

[III.

8-10

were soon reminded him and confronted with THE CONSEQUENCES OF DISOBEDIENCE (vv. 8-21). (2) 8. While, as it would seem, they were engaged in providforgot
of their responsibility to

ing themselves with a covering for their nakedness, they
lit. the voice of Yaweh, walking, taking in the garden, his garden as well as theirs in the cool of the day, just at evening, when one would Here the author naturally take such exercise (xxiv. 63).

heard Yaweh,
his pleasure
;

;

apparently attributes to God a ponderable form and When they heard parts, like those of human beings.

him, the man and his wife hid themselves among the trees in the garden. What prompted them thus

The usual answer is, to try to elude their Creator ? sense of guilt because they had disobeyed his command but see v. 10.
9.

A
;

After a

little,

as usual, called the

Yahweh, not finding them as readily man, as one man would call another,

The question calls not so saying, Where art thou? much for information with respect to the man's whereabouts as for an explanation of his disappearance. 10. The man, hearing the voice of his Maker, at once
I bepresents himself to give the desired explanation. came afraid, he says, because I was naked. This statement is often interpreted as a mere pretext (Holzinger), and utilized as an illustration of the rapidity of

the descent from innocence to depravity. It is very doubtful, however, if the author intended that it should

be so understood. In the first place, he had too great knowledge of human nature to represent the Fall as so precipitate, and, secondly, he had too much feeling for
literary effect to prefer a less, to a more, dramatic conSee xxvi. 7 ff. ; xliv. iff. The ception of his subject.

story gains in interest as well as naturalness on the sup-

III. 10-14]

COMMENTS

149

position that the man, surprised in the midst of a

new

experience before he has time for reflection, is giving the real reason for his flight in other words, is registering a second instance of the normal operation of the newly
;

The na'ivett with which he is thus acquired faculty. made to betray himself is, from a literary standpoint, one
of the finest features of the story. 11. The climax is reached in the'next question,*

Who
man

told thee thou

wast naked ? At

these words the

begins to realize what he has done, and his confusion at first renders him speechless. Indeed he does not venture
to speak until forced to

do so by the sterner demand,
tree from

Hast thou eaten from the

which

I

com-

thee not to eat ? 12. The mention of the interdict upon the tree of knowledge of good and evil recalled the threat by which it was accompanied, and filled the man with fear. When overcome by terror, men often do things unworthy of them. This first one is represented as seeking to save himself by inculpating his wife. Perhaps, also, the words attributed to him imply a disposition to make Yahweh
himself partially responsible for his disobedience.
are,

manded

They The woman thou placedst with me, gavest me as an associate, gave me from the tree and I ate. 13. The woman, in her turn, when called to account,
seeing that her tempter had told her but half the truth, said, The serpent beguiled me and I ate.
14. The examination ended, Yahweh proceeds to pass sentence upon the offenders, beginning with the serpent. In his first utterance he declares in general terms that it

shall be cursed, not only above all cattle, but above all the rest of the class, beasts of the field, to which, ac-

* The Syriac Version supplies as subject the equivalent of

Yahweh.

ISO

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[III. 14, 15

cording to v. I, it properly belongs.* It is to be the least favored of animals. The implication is that it was preIt is to be degraded in viously one of the most favored.
its

form and

habits.

The

decree

is,

On

thy belly shalt

thou
hint,

this time, therefore, according to the augo. thor, the serpent, of whose original shape there is no

At

by the divine

fiat

became the
its

limbless, wriggling

creature since
clause

known by dust shalt thou

name.

Comp.

Strack.

The

the one preceding. will henceforth live on dust, or dirt, but that, by its method of locomotion, it will be compelled to swallow more or less of the substance in which it moves. See Mic. vii. 17; comp. Is'a. Ixv. 25. The phrase touching the duration of the penalty, all the days of thy S>ee v. only mean as long as the species exists.
15.
life,

eat, is merely a development of It does not mean that the serpent

can

15.

of the curse is still to come. Yahweh I will also set enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy offspring, the whole

The worst
:

continues

serpent family,
race.

and her

offspring, the entire

human

Thus, according to the author, originated the antipathy, which he regarded as natural and universal, between men and snakes. When, therefore, he says they, mankind, shall bruise thee, he means, not the individual animal addressed, for, if it were bruised in the head, the feud would be ended, but its offspring.
So, also,
it

is

the offspring of the serpent that

is

to

wound f
*

mankind in the heel.

The

fact that

it is

the

meaning
f

Here, again, the word other must be supplied to complete the of the Hebrew author In English.
Delitzsch insists that

The meaning

puted.

following the

word here rendered wound, is discan only mean bruise. Dillmann, Greek Version, gives it the force of P)Stt7' aim at
of
F]1t27>

the

it

(trachten nach\

Holzinger suspects that it, as well as ^SU7 has both meanings, and that in this case it should be rendered, first by

III. 15, 16]

COMMENTS

151

head of the serpent which is to be bruised, and the heel of mankind that is to be wounded, has led many to suppose that the triumph of the offspring of the woman over the serpent's is here predicted (Luther). This, The head of the case. the not is serpent is however, that is the part of the animal where an because specified and the heel of the human speinjury is most effective cies because that is the only part within easy reach of
;

but a blow on the head is no more seritheir adversary the ous to serpent than a poisonous wound in the heel to
:

its

hereditary enemy.

There

is

thus no intimation with

respect to the outcome of the feud, unless it be in the fact that the enmity between the parties is represented

On the justice as a penalty inflicted upon the serpent. of this infliction it is enough to say that the Hebrews
saw no cruelty gerous to man.
1 6.

in putting to

death a beast that was dan-

See Ex.

xxi.

28

ff.

Turning now

tence upon her.*
free

woman, Yahweh passes senShe has hitherto known only the
to the

and agreeable play

nature.

The

of the forces implanted in her author evidently believed that, had she

bruise

and then by pant for, or a similar term. See the Vulgate. supposes it to have a twofold signification, but he, reSo calling the Syriac shaphyah, sting, makes the second pierce. the Sypiac Version. The second and third of these views are untenable, because they do not harmonize with the apparent aim of the author to explain, not only the mutual hatred existing between men and serpents, but the positive injuries which they are thereby prompted to inflict upon one another. Either of the other two seems It is not imposdefensible, that of Fiirst being most attractive. sible that in the second clause 13Q1tt7n is a mistake for 13Dltfn from "|Q?3> bite, sting, which would be the usual expression in such a connection. See xlix. 17. * The connective 1> here rendered but, is supplied from the Samaritan text, which is followed by the Greek Version.
Fiirst also

152

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
;

[III. 16

resisted the tempter, she would of suffering, even in childbirth

have remained ignorant
that, in fact, suffering

was now introduced

into the world as a

punishment for

her disobedience. This is what is meant, when Yahweh says, I will send thee labor very sore.* There follows

what seems to be a gloss inserted to prevent mistake with reference to the meaning of the ambiguous word The labor, which is used in a different sense in v. 1 8. f addition even thy pregnancy, however, was hardly necessary, since the next clause explains that the labor J
intended
is that of childbirth. The curse pronounced upon the woman, like that imposed upon the serpent, is twofold, and the second part is here, as in the former She was created the equal of case, a change of relation. her husband (ii. 24), and thus far she has consistently

been so represented but now Yahweh says, thy longshall be toward thy husband, and he shall ing rule over thee. The term longing is generally inter;

rendering would be, / will greatly multiply thy but this might be understood as implying that Hawwah had already had some experience in suffering, which the author would certainly not have admitted. The translation given above
literal

*

A

labor

:

precludes such a misunderstanding. f On the construction of "p~in>

or, as the Samaritans read, Gunkel, following the Greek Version, amends the text by substituting "pvan* thy sighing, or -pir* thy pain. So Ball. t For n!37 read, with the Samaritans, 7'Q^yThis is the reading of the Massoretic text, but instead of "fnp'lttJn the Greek and Syriac versions have the equivalent of

"pYHn

comp. Ges.

1

54, n. b.

irQIttfn* thy return ; and Ball, following Nestle, adopts the latter, citing in support of his opinion 2 Sam. xvii. 3, where, according to Driver (HTS, 248 f .), the correct reading is, as a bride returneth to her husband. Note, however, that in Cant. vii. n/io, where the versions again appear to have read "fraittfn for -jnp1ttfn return in the sense of 2 Sam. xvii. 3 is anything but appropriate.

III.

1

6,

17]

COMMENTS

153

preted as meaning sexual desire, to which the author is supposed to have intended to represent women as peculiarly subject.

tirely satisfactory.

This interpretation, however, is not enThe word here used is found in only

two other places in the Old Testament, iv. 7 and Cant, vii. n/io. In the former of these passages, if it means it must mean inclination, or something equally anything, removed from sensuality and in the latter, where a man
;

is

the subject,

There is

has the force of affection, devotion. therefore ground for the opinion that the author,
it

in this passage, intended to make Yahweh say that the very tenderness of the woman for her husband would en-

able

him

to

make and keep her
is
it

his inferior.

Whichever

of these views

should not be overlooked, adopted, that the change in the nature and destiny of the woman here described is not an effect produced by the forbidden
fruit

freely

or the act of disobedience, but a penalty chosen by Yahweh after the offence had been committed.
Delitzsch.

Comp.

all the man* receives his sentence. It is 17. none the lighter for the excuse he offered. Because thou hast listened to the voice of thy wife, says Yahweh. This means, what was taken for granted in the

Last of

case of the

woman,

that temptation, while

it

may explain,

does not excuse transgression. It is interesting to notice that even here the forbidden tree is not described by its properties, but as the tree concerning which I

commanded
it.

The

thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat from penalty is, cursed shall be the ground on thy
;

account
ishment.
part of
it

because of thy disobedience, and for

its

pun-

The

rest

is

occupied by

The earth, or that explanatory. the first pair, had hitherto produced
;

abundantly,
* This
is

and

seemingly without the necessity of
the Massoretic text has 'Ad/iam.

the

Greek reading

154

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[III. 17-19

The man, at least, is now fatiguing effort on their part. to be required to exert himself, and that painfully, that
he may obtain the means of subsistence. In his case the very ground has become an enemy, and in his case with pain also there is to be no end to the struggle shalt thou eat from it, lit. eat it, all the days of thy
;

Here, as in the case of the serpent, the individual addressed represents his kind. The last phrase, therefore, means as long as the race endures.
life.
1 8. In the preceding verse the author doubtless intended to convey the idea that, on account of the man's transgression, Yah weh then and there diminished the fer-

tility of

the earth.

He now
it

tor as decreeing that

shall henceforth

further represents the Creabe infested with

thorns and thistles, the most noxious

of weeds, which not only divide the productive power of the soil with useful plants, but hinder the latter from securing their share of nourishment. Heretofore there had been no-

thing of this kind. The full significance of this item appears with the further announcement that henceforth

man must

eat

the herb of the
to

field, the smaller plants
i.

According 29, God, immediately upon creating man, gave him every herb yielding seed that is on the face of the whole earth as well as all the trees, for his sustenance. This author evidently believed that man originally lived from the fruits of trees, and that the use of grains, etc., for food, and the toil necessary to produce them under existing conditions, were a reminder of God's displeasure with the first of the race.*
19.

or their fruits.

In

v.

the
it

man was

17 the strenuousness of the toil imposed upon indicated by the use of the same word for
in v. 16 for the suffering of the
if

that
*

was used

woman
that,

The above

interpretation,
is

correct,

makes

it

improbable

as Holzinger suggests, i8b

a gloss.

III. 19, 20]

COMMENTS
The same
thing
is

155

in childbirth.

now

familiar external manifestation.

pictured in its most In the sweat of thy

He adds, face, says Yahweh, shalt thou eat bread. until thou return to the ground.* These words, besides repeating the idea already expressed at the close of
v. 17,

the others were,

introduce the curse for which, as not substitutes, but
:

it

now

appears,

a

preparation.

Yahweh at last makes good his threat dust thou art, and to dust thou shalt return. The sentence is addressed to the man, but it applies also to the woman. Indeed, as in the previous cases, it is a hereditary infliction. As a penalty for the act by which the first pair
transgressed his command, Yahweh ordains that their bodies, and the bodies of their descendants, shall finally
dissolve

and mingle with the earth

of

originally a part.

When

the sentence

is

which they were to be executed,
to

and what

is

to

become

of the spirit thus released,

these questions, for the present at least, the author has no answer.
20. This verse has not the slightest connection with the preceding. In fact, it interrupts the connection and introduces discord into the story. Would the author of
it have represented the man f as replying to his death warrant by jauntily renaming his wife Hawwah, Life ?

The proper

occasion for such a change was after the

birth of her first child, when she might appropriately have been described as the mother of every one living.

Hence the

verse,

if

it

is

to

have any significance, must

be inserted after

iv.

i.f

* The added words, for from it thou wast taken, have the appearance of a gloss. f The Samaritan reading is 'Adham.
%
60.

So Bacon (GG, 104), who It would make sense also

refers
if

it

to

J.

Comp. Budde, BU,
iii.

inserted after

25 in

its

original

form.

156 21.

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[III. 21, 22

This section of the story closes with a statement

somewhat relieves the severity of the preceding verses. Yahweh, presumably out of pity for the helplessness of his unhappy creatures, made for the man * and his wife tunics of skin, to take the place of the aprons that they had made, or were making, for themSince there is no hint of a selves, and clothed them.
that

change

in climatic conditions, the object of

Yahweh

in

providing these first clothes must have been to satisfy the demands of modesty. The mention of skins, which could only be obtained by the slaughter of animals, as

the material out of which the garments were made, suggests several interesting questions What was done with
:

the flesh of the slaughtered animals ? Was it eaten by the man and his wife in apparent contradiction with v. 1 8,
or sacrificed to

Yahweh ?
?

If

this the first instance of sacrifice, or

the latter was the case, was had the custom ex-

isted

from the beginning

In other words what was the

author's idea of the significance of sacrifice ? He gives no clew to a reliable answer to any of these questions in this connection.

(3)

EXPULSION FROM PARADISE

(vv.

22-24).

This

part of the story was originally told in a single verse, but in the present text the conclusion has been expanded into

a separate scene, laid partly in heaven and partly on earth, by the addition of a duplicate of the original version in
22.

which the tree

of life reappears.

Yahweh

is

first

represented as considering with

his angels the best method of dealing with his disobedient creatures. The act committed has already been reported.

The
the

scene opens with a statement of the situation, Lo,

man
is

has become as one of

us,

knowing good
'Adham.

* This

the Greek reading; the Massoretic text has

III. 22-24]

COMMENTS

157

and

evil.

view between
is

This statement leaves no room Yahweh and the offenders just described.

for the inter-

It also betrays

safe to suppose,
is

the jealousy that the serpent, falsely, it imputed to the Creator. The rest of

the verse

in a similar strain, the reason assigned for

the garden being, lest he take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever. In other words, Yahweh seems more concerned to frustrate the ambition of his creature than to maintain his own The last sentence is incomplete, lacking a authority. would read, let us drive him from the which protasis,
driving the

man from

garden,

etc.

continuation of v. 22 is found in v. 24. These 23. two verses are separated by the simple statement with which, as has been intimated, the story originally concluded, then Yahweh sent him from the garden of 'Edhen * to till the ground whence he was taken. Thus was begun the execution of the sentence which was to end in death, f 24. This verse describes the removal of the man from
It says the garden in sterner terms than those of v. 23. the man was driven forth, and that, to keep him out, Yahweh stationed eastward of the garden of 'Edhen,

The

where the entrance was
*

located,

cherubs. J

The various

The phrase
ii.

story only in

15,

the garden of 'Edhen occurs elsewhere in the which is probably editorial, the original author
2, 3,

(ii. 16; iii. r, descriptive term of

always

8

bis, 10) is

saying simply the garden.

The

'Edhen

here, therefore, probably a gloss.

See
f

v. 24.

Compare Holzinger, who pronounces at least the last half of this verse an interpolation in contradiction with w. 17-19, although the final clause is a recapitulation of v. 19.
J The Greek version has he caused him (man) to dwell eastward of the garden of 'Edhen, and set the cherubs, etc., and Ball adopts In the this reading; but it can hardly represent the original text.

I

$8

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
Old Testament are
:

[III. 24

references to cherubs in the
classes
(/)

of

two

Yahweh
;

those in which they act as throne-bearers to (Ps. xviii. 11/10; Eze. x. I ff.), and (2) those in

which they serve as guardians of sacred places (Ex. xxv. i Kgs. vi. 23 ff. 1 8 ff. Eze. xxviii. 14 ff.). The passage now under consideration clearly belongs to the latter of
;

these classes.
that in
all

It is not,

however, necessary to suppose

Cheyne

cases of this sort the conception is identical. (Enc. Bib.) supposes the cherub to have been of

Hittite origin

and
;

originally to

form of the

griffin

but, since the narrative to

have had the fabulous which this

verse belongs, especially in

its later portions, betrays probable that the cherubs here meant were winged bulls, like those by which the entrances to Assyrian (and Elamitic) temples and palaces

Assyrian influence,

it

is

were flanked, and to which the name kirubu, as well as See Eze. x. 14, where shedu, was sometimes applied. cherub takes the place of the ox of 10 also Ball, LE
i.
;

y

KAT, 39 ff. ; Lenormant, BH, 117 31 Frd. Delitzsch, WLP, isoff. ; comp. Die. Bib. There was a second obstacle to the man's return in a gleaming,
ff.
;

ff.

;

Schrader,

that, not in the

whirling sword, cutting and thrusting this way and hand of one of the cherubs, but probably between them in the very entrance to the garden.* Thus carefully did Yahweh guard the way to the tree of
impedes the flow of the author's thought
;

life.
first place, it
is
;

further,

it

unlike the author of vv. 22 and 23 to introduce such a touch of consideration for man and finally, it is easily accounted for by

supposing that either the Greek translator or a copyist before him, recalling xi. 2, first mistook the object of the only verb in the clause and then supplied a synonymous verb to govern the following accusatives.

*

On
i

this

weapon

see the ingenious discussion of Lenormant,

BH,

3 6ff.

III.]

COMMENTS
Hebrew form was

159

story of the Fall in its intended to be taken literally ;

The

clearly

hence the interpretation in It is possible that the comments. adopted foregoing some who admit the correctness of this method of interpreting it will continue to regard it as veritable history, but most thoughtful people will feel obliged to question or deny the correctness of the account of the origin of

here given. Those who accept this result, however, need not reject the story as worthless, and therefore unworthy of a place in the Scriptures for, although it is
evil
;

not historically valuable, the religious ideas it inculcates, especially in view of the antiquity of their origin, are

remarkable for their excellence.

It

teaches, naively but

forcibly, the sovereignty as well as the beneficence of God, the freedom and responsibility of man, and the

dependence of human happiness upon obedience to the divine will. It is these ideas that have given the story
its

real value in the past, and,
will

they

make

it,

to those

who

if properly emphasized, read the Bible for edifica-

tion, equally helpful in

the future.*

The

exit of. the first pair

from the garden marks the

beginning, according to the Hebrews, of a new period in the history of the world, a period of rapid development
in

two

directions.

The

exiles

had taken their

first

step in

the arts of civilization

when they undertook

to provide

themselves with clothing. Their immediate descendants, seeking relief from the hard conditions under which they

had been condemned to
to their brute

live,

companions

in other similar

displayed their superiority achievements.

The development in this direction, however, as the record is now constituted, is more or less obscured by the promi*

On

Boscawen,
37
f-

an alleged Babylonian parallel to the story of the Fall, see BM, 85 ff. Ryle, ENG, 39 ff comp. Schrader, T,
;
.

;

KA

160

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[IV.

i

nence given to the growing alienation of the race from

The first sin, although, so the same period. can be learned from the record, it did not disorganize human nature, as it has sometimes been repreGod during
far as

sented to have done, and although the ills by which it was punished remained as a warning against further offences, was followed by others, until the race became a race of evil-doers. This period may therefore be called
the period of
2.

EARLY GROWTH AND CORRUPTION
history of
of
it first

(iv. i-vi. 8).

The composite
a.

follows
(iv.

The Line
is

Kayin

1-24),

the account of which
(i)

largely devoted to
(vv. 1-16).
v.

THE FIRST MURDER
and parts of

The
;

first

verse of

this passage

16 are generally attributed the rest of it, to the author of the story of the Fall owing to discrepancies with the preceding and following
context,
is

The
(a)

occasion of this

supposed to be the work of another hand.* first crime was

A Rejected Offering (vv. 1-7). i. The man began To once to pay the penalty imposed upon him. a brief but his was wife, Hawwah,f respite granted finally she conceived J and, in process of time, bore
at
;

* The

first

verse supplies the genealogical table in

w.

17

ff.

with

a needed starting-point. See also the name Yahweh^ which, the correctness of the reading being taken for granted (compare the Greek Version), the author of w. 25 f. as well as w. 3-1 6a would hardly have put into the mouth of Hawwah. For further discrepancies compare

W. 2 and 20, v. 12 and iii. 17, and w. 14 and 17. /. See also Budde, BU, 183 ff. Bacon, GG, 105; comp. Dillman f If, as has been suggested, iii. 20 belongs after iv. i, this name must have been inserted after the former verse had been removed
/'.

;

to

its present position. \ Rashi and others give to this and the preceding verb the sense of the Pluperfect, and i Sam. ix. 15 ff. and 2 Kgs. viii. i ff. make it

IV.

i,

2]

COMMENTS
Kayin.

161

her

first child,
is

Comp.

v.

3.

The words

with

represented as greeting him illustrate a sayof She forgot the anguish he had cost her Jesus. ing for joy that a man had been born into the world (Jno.

which she

xvi. 21)

;

saying exultingly, I

have gained * a

man with

phrase is not entirely clear, but it probably means by the aid of the Deity, f 2. The birth of Kayin was followed by that of a brofinal

Yahweh.

The

ther,

diately for, as twins, he
;

but probably not, as some (Reuss) infer, immehad the author meant to represent the boys would have done so in a way not to be mis-

The name given to the younger was Hebhel, but the present text gives no reason for so naming
taken.
necessary to admit the possibility of such an interpretation but more natural to suppose the author to have intended to say that the man did not know his wife, or, at any rate, that their inter;

it is

course did not result in conception, until after their expulsion from the garden.

* The verb H3p (kanah) was doubtless used, not because the author derived Kayin from it, but because the name, whose meaning according to some authorities is spear (Die. Bib.}, according to others smith (Enc. Bib.\ in sound suggested it. In other words, it is a case of alliteration, imperfectly reproduced in English by the

rendering gained.
f

On

the force of HS> see Mic.

iii.

8.

It is also

used to desig-

nate a definite Accusative.

Hence some exegetes have interpreted Yahweh as a second Accusative, thus making Hawwah say that she had gotten the Deity either as a son (Luther) or a husband

(Umbreit). Both of these alternatives must be rejected ; the former because it anticipates a much later doctrine, and the latter because
the child's, and not the husband's, name that is to be explained. more attractive suggestion is that, as the Targum of Onkelos and the Samaritan Version would indicate, the original reading was not nS but nAfofrom with or from. Zeydner (Z^4 W, 1898, 1 20) prefers J"IS> sign, interpreted here and v. 15 as circumcision, while Gunkel would emend HS to msns> / desired. The Greek Version has through (Sf ) God. Comp. Haupt in Addenda to
it is

A

mm

Ball's Genesis, 118.

162

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
;

[IV. 2-4

him.*

sheep

In process of time he became a keeper of better, perhaps, small cattle, since the word

usually rendered sheep includes both sheep and goats. See Gen. xxvii. 9. The inference is that he was the first
of his class; but see v. 20,

where the

credit of intro-

ducing the occupation of keeping cattle large and small is given to Yabhal, the oldest son of Lemekh. That Hebhel ate the flesh, as well as drank the milk and wore the wool, of his flock, may be taken for granted. See
also v. 4.

The final clause, which was probably originally attached immediately to v. I, or some form of it,f states that Kayin, following the example of his father, became
a
tiller of

the ground.

For the continuation

of the

original account of him, see v. i6b. The date of the inserted incident is indefinite. 3.

It

occurred after a time, lit. after days, when Kayin, not necessarily for the first time, brought from the produce
of the ground, the fruit of his
in kind,
toil,

an

offering, tribute

to

Yahweh

;

to

whom

he thus formally acknow-

4a.

ledged himself indebted for the success of his husbandry. At the same time Hebhel also brought an offering.

He

is

said to have taken for this purpose

from the

first-

lings of his flock; not, however, the entire carcass (Keil), but, as is explained in a gloss, their fat,{ the

The meaning of the name is disputed. A favorite opinion has been, that it is identical with the appellative hebhel, breath, vanity, and that it was given in allusion to the brevity of the owner's life ; others have connected it with the Assyrian aplu, son (Schrader,
*

KAT,

44

ff.);

but a more probable conjecture
it

is

that,

like the

Syriac habbala, Yabhal, v, 20.
t

originally
is that,

had the

signification shepherd.

See

The

supposition

text
J
n.
I,

had the unemphatic form

before the introduction of Hebhel, the ^p ^m- See Ges. 142, I.

On
b.

the relation of this phrase to the preceding, see Ges. 154, One reason for pronouncing it a gloss is that the suffix of

IV. 4-7]

COMMENTS
iii.

163
xxiii.

ritual (Ex. parts which, according to the Mosaic

i8b; Lev.

The
4b.

rest

were regularly burned on the altar. the feast which always accompanied furnished
3
f.),

such an offering.

Yahweh had
gave
it

ing
ing

;

neglects to
fire

to

regard to Hebhel and his offerHow he did so, the author would have said by sendHe probably say. consume the offering, as in the case of
his approval.
vi.

Manoah's
Strack.

(Jud.
5.

21) or Elijah's

(i

Kgs.

xviii. 38).

Comp.

On

the other hand, to

Kayin and

his offer-

ing he
of

is left plenty not probable that the author would have explained the failure of Kayin to please his Maker as due to the character of his offering ;

had not

regard.
;

Here again there
it

room

for conjecture

but

is

e.

g.,

because

it

was a vegetable rather than an animal
;

offering (Tuch), or because it was not so choice as that of his brother (Delitzsch) much less because it was not

properly prepared for the altar
last to attribute

(Ball).

He

would be the

inference from
disposition,

importance to such matters. The natural v. 7 is that Kayin had manifested a bad
his offering

and that the rejection of

was

of

This inference seems to be confirmed by his conduct on the present occasion. He became very angry and downcast, lit. his face fell. See the English chapfallen. 6. Yahweh remonstrated with him, art thou
the nature of an admonition.

Why

angry?
7.

Kayin was angry because he and

his offering
it

had

not been received with favor.

This fact makes

neces-

sary to suppose that, in the apodosis of If
(Sam. frTobn)
is plural,

thou doest

although under the circumstances

the author of the story can hardly have thought of Hebhel as bringing more than one animal. On the construction of the phrase, of the firstlings, etc., so interpreted, see Ex. vi. 25 and Job xxvii. 6.

164

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[IV. 7

well, the word expressing the result, lit. uplifting? is to be rendered, not cheerfulness (Dillmann), but accept-

See i Sam. xxv. 35. This rendering is in harwith the natural interpretation of the next clause, where doth not sin lie at the door f teaches that the
ance.

mony

evil-doer

must answer

for his deeds,

and implies that no

such person can expect to find favor for himself or his The teaching of the whole utofferings with Yahweh.
" the sacrifices of the wicked terance, therefore, is, that " are an abomination to Yahweh see also (Prv. xv. 8
;

Am.

v.

21

ff.

;

Isa.

i.

10

ff.).

There follows a statement

that has the appearance of a gloss suggested by a mistaken interpretation of the word lie.\ Its real force is

with Gen.

seen in Deu. xxix. 19/20. The scribe, however, probably xlix. 9 in mind, interpreted it as meaning lie in wait, and, thinking it important that the reader should be

reminded that man had power to resist evil even after his expulsion from Paradise, added yet toward thee shall

be

its,

the crouching

sin's,

rule, prevail,

over

it.

The

longing, and thou shalt inappropriateness of the term
apparent.

longing in this connection

is

t The last words are usually rendered affirmatively, sin lieth, etc., but the parallelism between the two conditional clauses requires that the interrogative, which, in the original, precedes the particle introducing the first, should be supplied with the second. See Ges.

152,3-

The

present text has been rendered, Whether thou bringest a
;

but, although Stt73 might mean bring a gift, DSttfb ^IDTf could hardly mean bring a rich gift. The Greek Version reads, If thou bringest rightly, but dost not rightly divide, hast thou not sinned? Be still; to thee shall be his

rich offering or not, etc. (Budde)

(Hebhel's) return,
of the
first,

etc.; and in spite of the evident unnaturalness and the inconsequence of the last, half of the verse thus

rendered, Ball corrects the text to

make

it

agree with this reading.

IV. 7-9]
(b)

COMMENTS
Offerer's

165

The

soon does not appear
brother.
8.

Resentment vented

(vv.

8- 1 6)

finally

how

itself

upon

his innocent

begins,

the

The present text is corrupt or defective. The verse Then Kayin said to Hebhel but no speech of one to the other follows. The Samaritan reading,
;

is followed by the versions, puts into Kayin's mouth, Let us go to the field, .and the insertion of these or similar words seems justified by the context.*

which

If Kayin's crime immediately followed his rejection by Yahweh, the object of the invitation may have been to draw Hebhel away from the altar, where the violence intended would have been sacrilege (Strack). In any case they were apart from the rest of the family when Kayin assailed, lit. arose against,] Hebhel his brother

and
9.
is

killed him.

As

in

the case of the

first

transgression, the deed

hardly committed before Yahweh appears on the scene. Kayin, however, meets the accusation implied in the question, Where J is Hebhel, thy brother ? not with

an excuse, but with a falsehood.

ments the
insolence

lie,

I

know

worthy

Indeed, he supplenot, with a gratuitous display of of a hardened criminal, I

Am

my

brother's keeper ? The only change that seems required
letter of

is

the omission of the last

nSt2H>

sin,

masculine, so that it the Syriac Version, in which the subjects of the last clause are
transposed. * Tuch
supplies it after -ittS^j

thus transforming it from a feminine to a will agree with its predicate \^m lying. See

while

Bottcher emends
to,

by

changing

this

verb to "lOttPT*

and he watched, and bs>

to

ns

the sign of the definite Accusative; but neither of these suggestions has found much favor. More attractive is Ball's (Addenda}
S% suggestion, 3~)S 1

and he

lay in wait.
text.

by> with Ball, instead of the bs to, of the Massoretic So Ball. j For >S read, with the Samaritans, ITS\

166

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[IV. 10-13

10. Here, as in iii. 13, Yahweh's disapproval first takes the form of a question, What hast thou done ? then he distinctly charges Kayin with the crime that he has

committed, The voice of thy brother's blood crieth to me, demanding retribution.

Kayin attempts no defence. Yahweh therefore once proceeds with the sentence, Cursed shalt thou be from the ground. The meaning of the last phrase is disputed. The prominence given to the thought of banishment in the following context has led mostexe11.

at

getes to interpret the preposition from as denoting separation (Dillmann) but since, according to I2a, the
;

ground
Kayin' s

is

actually to be cursed with unfruitfulness

on

account, the author must here have thought of it as the means by which he was to be punished, as well as the place from which in punishment he was to be

banished. By the ground that hath opened its mouth to receive thy brother's blood is meant the comparatively fertile region in which the crime was committed. See vv. 14 and 16.
1 2.

The

twofold nature of the curse
says,
it

is

Of the ground Yahweh

shall

now explained. no longer*

yield thee its wealth, lit. strength (Hos. vii. 9), as if it had thus far been Comp. iii. 17 f. normally fruitful. Secondly, and partly on account of the difficulty of obtaining a subsistence from the soil, but partly in obedience to the spur of conscience, he is to be a and a fugitive up and down in the earth.
13.
fills

wanderer

The

him with

prospect that these words disclose to Kayin terror but, instead of confessing the enor;

mity of his guilt, as he has been understood by translators and commentators to have done, he merely protests against the severity of the penalty imposed upon
*

On

the Jussive

Fpn

lit.

let it

no longer, see Ges.

109, 2, b.

IV. 13-15]

COMMENTS

167

him. punishment, he says in response to the divine decree, is greater than I can bear. 14. His version of the sentence omits any mention of

My

the diminution of the fruitfulness of the earth.*

Nor

does he seemingly object to banishment from the face of the ground, the cultivable and cultivated region in

which he may be supposed to have been born and reared, although it implies absence from Yahweh as well as
endless unrest, so

much

as the threatened exposure to

the vengeance of his fellows. the first one who, meeteth

His plea

me
?

most brutal men are often the
question,

Whosoever, The most cowardly. The
is,

will kill me.
not so

Whom

did Kayin fear

is

difficult as

has sometimes been imagined. The answer is probably to be found in the admission that the Kayin here meant

was not the son
;

of the first

writgeneration ten for its present setting. 15. Yahweh admitted Kayin's plea and provided against If any one kill Kayin, he decreed, the dreaded result.

in other words, that this story

man, but belonged to a was not

later

he (Kayin) shall be avenged sevenfold.
mann.

Comp.

Dill-

appointed, selected and ordained, for in his interest and for his protection, a sign. Kayin, This sign was not a wonder to allay Kayin's fears, lest he should himself be murdered (Clarke), but a warning to those whom he feared, that whoever met him should not kill him, /. ^., to prevent any one who met him from
also
killing him.

He

This, according to

some
of

was a miraculous intervention
assailant (Ber.

Yahweh

that

Rab. 105 f.). A more probable opinion is was a mark on the body, perhaps the forehead, by which he would be recognized as a man under divine
it

early authorities, to terrify his

*

A

circumstance which

may indicate

that I2a

is

not a part of

the original text.

168

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
Marks
;

[IV. 15-17
xiii.

protection.
;

of this sort are referred to Ex.
ix.

9 Lev. xix. 28 See Stade, ZA
1

Eze.
y

W

4

ff.

;

also Rev.

xiii.

16

f.

;

etc.

1894, 301

ff.

6.

Thus

furnished, through

the

divine

clemency,

Kayin went

forth from the presence of

Yahweh,

and the region under Yahweh's immediate protection, and dwelt in the land of Nodh. The expression dwelt is hardly in harmony with the sentence pronounced upon Kayin, to the effect that he should be a fugitive in the earth. Hence the statement of which it is a part
probably belonged originally, not to the preceding story, but with vv. 17 ff. This leaves the meaning of the name

Nodh

unexplained, the author by whom it was preserved saying of the region thus designated only that it was eastward of Eden, on the eastern border of that in
ii.

which, according to

8,

the garden was situated.

Comp.

Boscawen,

BM,

92

f.

The
(2)

story of the

first

murder interrupted that
(vv. 17-24).

of

THE EARLIEST
now resumed.
tiller

CIVILIZATION
17.
soil,

The

lat-

ter

is

became a

of the

Kayin, who, according to v. 2, Where he finally took a wife.

got her, the author seems not to have thought it necesIt is probably to be taken for granted sary to explain.

here and throughout this genealogy, that the record

is

either necessarily or intentionally incomplete. Kayin's wife bore Hanokh.* The author proceeds to say that
*

The name occurs

that of a son of

Midian (Gen. xxv.

several times in the Old Testament; once as It is therefore hardly safe 4).

to say that its original signification

was Instruction or Dedication.

following Sayce (HL, 185), identifies it with Unug (Abode), the Akkadian form of />-/ (Heb. 'Orekh), the name of a city associated with the Babylonian as well as the bibliart. Cainites,

Cheyne (EB\

Nimrodh, the date of whose origin belongs to the earliest period Mesopotamian civilization. See Die. Bib. art. Erech; Frd. Delitzsch, WLP, 221 ff.
cal
in the history of

iv.

i;, is]

'COMMENTS
;

169

he,

Hanokh, was the builder of a city i. e., the first to engage in such an enterprise and that he called it after
;

his

own

*

name Hanokh. The difficulty in understand-

ing the statement that a son of Kayin was the founder of a city is relieved by recalling that the Hebrew city was

not necessarily a large enclosure (xix. 20), and that origiand nally there was no connection between this passage the story of the fratricide. 1 8. The next four names in the genealogy are mere links connecting the head of the line with later and more

important descendants.
sha'el,
*

To Hanokh was born
in

(

Iradh,t

who begot Mehiyya'el4 who
the father of Lemekh.
||

turn begot

Methu-

The Massoretic

quiring that Kayin be
ever, is

text has 133 DB73, after his son's name, remade the subject of both verbs. This, how-

awkward and unlike the author

of the passage.

It is there-

fore probable that the original text had or T12n, Hanokh, after ^I"P1 and was,

Win, he (was), instead of, and that, when this reading was wittingly or unwittingly changed, the word ]2, son, was inserted to give the whole the desired or supposed import. See Budde, BU, I2off. comp. Dillmann. t The derivation of this name is in dispute. If related to Tn37> wild ass, it would naturally denote swiftness or shyness. Holzinger suggests a connection with "H37, 'Aradh, a city of southern
;

Judah

If, however, Hanokh represents Uruk, it is (Jud. i. 16). certainly possible that, as Sayce (HL, 185 f.) also maintains, 'Iradh is only another form of Eridu, the name of another Babylonian city

as ancient as
\

it

was famous.

Comp. Cheyne, EB,

art. Cainites.

The name
ff.)

forms, bwinE

of the son of 'Iradh appears in two slightly different and bs^nft, in this connection. Of the two Budde
to

(BU, 125

seems
is

have shown that the

latter,

the pronunciation
If

This name

capable of two interpretations.
it

tt?>

sha, be

treated as a relative, as in Assyrian,

will

mean man of God:

||

cabulary.

The name Lemekh finds no explanation in the Hebrew voBudde (BU, 102, 129) conjectures that it must have some

170
19.

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
This

IV.

T9

Lemekh

is

important for his

own

sake, being

the

He had two wives. The fact is polygamist. Hence it is safer reported without apparent disapproval.
first

to suppose that, originally at any rate, it was intended to serve as an indication of material progress than of moral

deterioration (Dillmann). The names of his wives were 'Adhah, according to xxxvi. 2 that of one of the wives of

Esau (comp.

xxvi. 34),

and Sillah.*

el to Mahyfel, God giveth life, however, the genealogy is really ancient, this form, being good Hebrew, must be either a translation or a corruption of the original name. The conjecture that the form here found is a mistake for the bsbbnft, M'fflaVel of v. 12

of which he changes from is the preferable reading.

M hiyya
e

>

If,

(Lagarde), and the latter a corruption of the Assyrian compound Amil-ili, man of God (Cheyne), can hardly be called satisfactory. See further Ball, SBOT, Notes.
it must be rendered man of desire. Cheyne and others, on the evidence of the Greek Version, pronounce it a corruption of nbtPinE, Methushelah (v. 21), in which they see the Hebraised form of the Assyrian compound Mutu-sharrahi, man of the gigantic one, the equivalent of Amil-Sin (Berosus, Amempsinos], man of Sin, the name of one of the antediluvian kings of Babylonian mySee Cheyne, EB, art. Cainites / Lenormant, BH, 220. thology. The most attractive feature of this last view is that Sin, the Moon, was the patron deity of 'Ur and Haran. See Jastrow, RBA, 76.

otherwise

connection with arms or violence.

Sayce and others connect

it

with Lamga, a non-Semitic title of the god Sin, of which Ubarra in Ubarra-Tutn, servant of Marduk, the name of another king of the antediluvian period (Berosus, Obartes\ is the equivalent. See Sayce, HL, 186; Lenormant, BH, 220; Ball, SBOT, Notes.

* The attempt has been made to discover in these names a mythical significance (Lenormant, BH, i88ff.); but. they are so easily explained as personifications of qualities valued in women,
that this has
latives they

now become

the favorite opinion.

As Hebrew

appel-

would be rendered respectively Beauty and Shadow. See Baethgen, BSR, I49ff. Cheyne, EB, art. Cainites.
;

IV. 20, 2i)

COMMENTS

171

'Adhah bore her husband at least two sons. The mentioned was Yabhal.* He was the father, the first to engage in such an occupation, of every f one that dwelleth in tents with cattle, J wandering from place to place with the flocks and herds in which his wealth consists. Yabhal, therefore, was not the the first nomad. first but shepherd, only Compare vv. 2 and 12. Moreover, the nomadic life here appears to be perfectly legitimate and honorable. 21. A brother of Yabhal, named 7ubhal, became the father of every one that handleth the lyre and the pipe. The former was the simplest, commonest, and therefore doubtless the oldest, stringed instrument in use among the Hebrews. It was played by all classes and on all occasions. See xxxi. 27 I Sam. x. 5 (Eng. It was the instrument that David played with harp). his recognized skill (i Sam. xvi. 16 ff.). See Benziger,
20.

name

of the first

;

but here

* The word occurs (Isa. xxx. 25) in the sense of conduit, canal, it seems to be an equivalent of Hebhel, Shepherd. The Greek Version has Yodel, the Hebrew of which means ram, i. e.,
f

the leader of the flock.

The word b^
21,

in

T/.

is wanting in the Massoretic text, but, being used should without doubt be supplied in this, a precisely simi-

lar connection.

J This

is

the proper rendering,
lit.

whether the correct text be
as Ball (comp. Addenda},
fol-

n3pE1 bnS,
lowing 2 Chr.
niDpft

tent

and cattle,

or,

xiv.
lit.

''bns,

14/15 and the Greek Version, prefers to read, tents of cattle. On the construction, see Ges.

117,4,

R4c.

This word also occurs (Jer. xvii. 8) in the sense of stream. Dillmann suggests that its appropriateness as the name of a musician is explained by a connection with b^V, sometimes used in the sense of ram's horn (Ex. xix. 13). Since, however, the original meaning of the latter was ram (Jos. vi. 5) his explanation seems A better is that it is an arbitrary variation on the predefective. ceding name to denote a different, but related, occupation. See
Baethgen,

BSR,

149; comp. Cheyne,

EB,

art.

Cainites.

i;2

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
;

[IV. 21, 22

HA,

274 ff. Die. Bib. art. Music. The latter of the instruments named was probably a correspondingly simple wind instrument, perhaps the Pan's pipe. See Benziger,

HA,

to the

276 Riehm, HBA, art. Mtisik. Thus, according Hebrews, the first musician, though not himself a
;

shepherd, was a brother to the
calling.

first

to adopt the pastoral

22.

Sillah also bore

Lemekh

a son,

Tubhal

;

of

the author seems to have intended to say, that he the father of every one that worketh copper

whom was
and

This Tuiron,* in other words, the first metallurgist. bhal had a sister, whose name, like that of the Ammonitess,

Rehoboam's mother (i Kgs. xiv. 21), was Na'amah.f She seems to have no function except to make the num-

ber of children assigned to Sillah equal to that of her For the legends with which the Hebrews rival's family.
* The Massoretic text has Tubhal Kayin a smith every one, etc., is clearly not the original The analogy of the reading. statements respecting Yabhal and Yubhal requires 'OS fPn Sin, he was the father of, in this case also. The Greek Version, which has Kal fy instead of KA.iv, points in the same direction. The word

which

ttfttb,

smith,
is

position
or,

is probably a marginal gloss to ETUI, whose present explained by the fact that it is also a synonym of "pp,

at

any

rate,

of the
is

Aramaic
too rare a

^p.
word

The

objection by

Budde

(BIT, 139), that IPtob

for a gloss, loses its force

when one

recalls that,

although

it is

same sense

in

Hebrew, the

latter is

less frequent than ETin in the not used in this sense in

Aramaic, the language of the later Hebrews, while the former is common to the two dialects. As for the name Tubhal, it also seems to be a variation upon Yabhal, but, if it is, its precise form may have been determined by that of the name of a tribe, the Tibarenians, southeast of the Black Sea (x. 2), who supplied Tyre with implements in copper or bronze (Eze. xxvii. 13). t In Jos. xv. 41, this name, which means pleasant, is given to a place in southern Judah. See also Nozomi and Aframan. This is evidently another case of the same sort as those of 'Adhah and Sillah. See Baethgen, BSR, 150.

IV. 23]

COMMENTS

173

supplemented their lack of knowledge respecting see Lenormant, BH, 204 ff.
23.

her,

mekh.

There follows a song put into the mouth of LeThe close connection between it and the account

of the origin of metallurgy naturally gave rise to the supposition that it was intended to commemorate the

discovery by Tubhal of the art of manufacturing weapons from the metal in which he wrought (Herder). If, howit were a sword-song, Lemekh should have been the inventor of the sword as well as the author of the song.*

ever,

When

interpreted,

as

it

must

found to voice the

fierce passions

of justice that the lex talionis ; In I ff. ; Num. xxxv. 9 ff.) was intended to regulate. form it consists of three distichs, each of which illustrates

by itself, it will be and the crude notions Deu. xix. (Ex. xxi. 12 ff.
be,

the most striking feature of Hebrew poetry, parallelism. In the first, the object of which is to secure the attention of thote addressed,
in

'Adhah and Sillah is repeated wives of Lemekhf, and hear \ my voice in give ear to my speech. The members of a so-called synonymous parallelism, however, are not always perfectly equivHence it is not necessary to suppose that the alent.
Lemekh's vengeance is the same person in both His boast is that he slays a man, either the one who has injured him or a relative, if he is wounded, and a boy belonging to the family of the offender for a
victim of
cases.
* Budde (BU, 139
of the passage,
if.)

contends that
text to

this

was the
it

and emends the

make
N

theory

;

omitting 22b, and, for

bD

Itftob

]

p,

original sense correspond to his Kayin a smith all,

TP1, and Lemekh was, or, if 22b must be reafter it. tained, inserting 'm Ittb f Compare Holzinger, who attaches the former phrase to the superscription, so that the song is made to begin, Hear my voice,
substituting "jab

Wl

etc.

t

On

the form ]2EH7 see Ges.

46, 2,

R

3.

174

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[IV. 23,24

wale, a less serious injury. In both* cases the harm he inflicts far exceeds that which he himself has suffered.

death for a blow, Lemekh finally puts If, he says, Kayin, the first of the race to bear a personal name, was avenged, or
24.

The

ratio,

into a numerical form.

avenged himself,t sevenfold, then shall

Lemekh be
See

seventy and seven times,
Mat.
xviii. 22.

as fully as possible. J

is the natural interpretation of vv. 17-24 from their context. When, however, they are apart viewed as a part of the larger whole to which they belong, they cease to be merely a picture of the social and industrial activities of the earliest ages, and, so re-

The above

pulsive

is

author to
stage in edness.

frank brutality, according to the they owe their present position, mark a the progress of the race in violence and wickThe modern reader, who realizes the twofold

Lemekh 's

whom

significance of the passage, will find in
illustration of the rapidity with

its history an which the Hebrews under

the tuition of the prophets developed in the direction of For other cases of the same kind, see vi. I ff. morality.

and

ix.

20

ff .

Having thus followed the
*

line of

Kayin

until

it

be-

On

the meaning of see 2 Kgs. ii. 23
t

On the rendering given to the verb, see Ges. 107, 2, c. sometimes improperly translated young man,

lV
f.

The

reflexive idea

than

Qpv

Hence Budde (BU,

would properly be expressed by Dp") rather 134) emends the text by substitut-

ing the former for the latter. \ The reference to Kayin at

first sight seems to argue that the but the Kayin of this song, though no match for Lemekh in the latter's estimation, is a heroic figure, and therefore the conception of another than the author of the story of

chapter thus far

is

a unit

;

the fratricide.

IV. 25]

COMMENTS
-

175

came

alienated from God, the sacred historian returns

to his starting traces

point

with the

first

pair,

and thence

b. The Line of Sheth (iv. 25-v. 32). seems to have had at his hand two complete accounts of Sheth and his descendants. One of these, for obvious reasons, he preserved entire. The one best

He

suited

to his purpose,

Kayin and Hebhel. To this omission, he inserted

however, entirely ignored both forestall the natural effect of

GENEALOGICAL FRAGMENT (iv. 25 f.), which is (i) supposed to be the beginning of the (to him) less valuable genealogy.* For other remnants of it, see chapter v. knew 25. After the murder of Hebhel the man
j

A

his wife,J again.
as the

Her

third son

she

called Sheth,

* This second genealogy, which had the same number of names 2 the modificafirst, in its original form is attributed to J tions that appear in the fragment here preserved, to the editor by
;

whom

Oxford Hex.

the story of the fratricide was inserted (Cornill, T, 43 f ; ii. On the source of the original there are two 7).
.

EA

The more prevalent is that it was constructed principal theories. from the Kayinite genealogy by the insertion of the names of
Sheth and'Enosh(Budde, BU, 175 ff.). Stade (ZA W, 1894, 276 ff.), however, contends that these two names originally belonged to the

which
t

Kayinite genealogy, and that therefore the latter, in the form in it has been preserved, was produced by their removal. See

also Steuernagel,

DJ, 269; comp. Lenormant,
22 and
24,

BH,

184!!.

This
ii.

is

the reading that seems to be required by the analogy
iii.

of

15

and

passages closely related to

this verse.

The Massoretic text has ^Adham. See Budde, BU, 135, 162 f. % Her name appears in the Greek and the Syriac Version also the clause, and she conceived. The Greek Version further inserts saying before Hawwah's speech but this is perhaps only a free
; ;

rendering for the ^,for, of the original, which is not otherwise translated. For TTO, again, on the other hand, it presents no
equivalent.

For S~)pm, and she
called.

called, the

Samaritans read N^TI,

and he

i

;6

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[IV. 25, 26

name by saying, God, not Yahweh (see hath set * me other offspring instead of Hebhel. These words make the clause, since Kayin hath killed him, by the same or a later hand, an unnecessary
explaining the
v. 26),

amplification. Comp. Delitzsch. 26. The complete genealogy might

duced without further preliminaries. from the parallel account, however,

A

have been introsecond section
added, probably

is

for the purpose of preserving the interesting statement with which it closes, to the effect that 'Enosh,f the son
of Sheth,

weh.

was the Elsewhere

first J
(xii.

to call on the
xiii.

name
;

of

Yah-

8;

4;

xxi.

33

xxxiv. 5) to call by the

name of Yahweh

25; Ex. means to worxxvi.

This, however, can hardly be its meaning ship him. in the present passage. Its actual significance may be inferred from the fact that, in the preceding verse, pains
is

words,

taken to avoid the use of the name Yahweh. In other it means that, according to the author here represented, this divine name was first used in the time of
'Enosh.

Comp. Dillmann.
iii.

For other views on the sub2
f.

ject,

see Ex.

14

f.

and

vi.

* Hebrew ntP, shath, a word-play like that in
v. 29.

v.

i.

See also

f

The real significance of the name is unknown. Like 'Adham originally an appellative for man, but mostly
See Ps.
viii. 5.

poetical.
J

text has Ttf, then was begun, but the analogy of x. 8 requires bnn Win, he began. See also the Greek and Samaritan readings, which, though themselves faulty, indicate what must have been the original phraseology. The only passage that can be cited against the interpretation

The Massoretic

bmn

where the name Yahweh is put into the mouth from J 1 Yahweh is perfectly in place in it, and if it is from the same author as these last verses, the reading should undoubtedly be God, as in the Greek Version. Steuerhere given
of
is v. i,
;

Hawwah

but,

if it is

,

nagel's theory (>/, 269), that furnishes a third alternative.

w.

25

f.

originally preceded v.

I,

V. 1-3]
(2)

COMMENTS

177

THE COMPLETE GENEALOGY (v.), for which the fragjust discussed

ment

was intended to prepare the way, was doubtless preferred because, although it was not so interesting to the casual reader, it furnished the materials for

a chronology of the earliest period of the world's history. In the document from which it was taken it consti1. tuted a separate book with a title of its own, This is the

Book

of the

Generations of Adham.

This

title

be-

trays the author of the table, and the statement that, when God created men, he made them in the like-

ness of God, confirms the first impression, passage came from the same source as the
i.

viz., that
first

the

account
ii.

of creation, the so-called Priestly narrative.

See
i.

4

;

26

f.

2. For the phrase male and female, see statement that God blessed them refers to

27.

The
f.,
i.

i.

28
to

and
26.

that concerning the
3.

name

given to them,

Man,

term, in Hebrew 'Adham, which man and woman, is now first included both originally a as name to the first man. When he had applied proper
lived
It is plain

The common

a hundred and thirty years, he begot a child.* enough from these words that the author of

the genealogy intended to represent this child as 'Adham's firstborn. His meaning is rendered unmistakable by the addition of in his own likeness and after his

image, an explanation which would naturally accompany a description of the first birth, but which would be superfluous in any subsequent case. This, however,
is

own

image

not the entire significance of the expression. The of 'Adham can only mean likeness to the God-like
(i.

nature with which he was endowed at his creation

27).

The author therefore
*

ignores, not only

Kayin and Hebhel,

On
i,

the omission of the object, which Ball supplies, see Ges.

"7,

R5-

i;8

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[V.

4, 5

In other but the story of the Fall and its consequences. words, as has already been intimated, this fifth chapter is the continuation of ii. 3.
4.

The interval between
is

the creation of
for

'

Adham and the
is

birth of his first child

a long one, but
life,

it

not out of

proportion to the rest of his

he lived * after

begetting his firstborn no fewer than eight

hundred

years.
5.

The

notice of

'Adham

closes with the total of the

It makes so vast a period that many years of his life. ardent defenders of the Scriptures have felt forced to

interpret the terms used as having other than their natural and obvious meanings. Thus, e. g., it has been proto the reckon here and elsewhere in this posed year

chapter as a period of less than twelve months. f This method, however, creates as serious difficulties as it removes for (/), unless unwarrantable violence is done to
:

the text, some of the patriarchs are thus made to beget children before they reach the age for paternity and (2) the period from 'Adham to Noah, too short when the fig;

ures are given their largest value, is thus abbreviated to such an extent as to be absolutely insignificant. Finally, any such method of interpretation is forbidden by the fact
* The Massoretic text has

D1S

^ Ym, And
7, 10, etc.,

the days of 'Ad-

ham were;

requires DIM VT1, And 'Adham lived, and this is the reading of the Arabic, and some copies of the Syriac, Version. Hens, f The following schemes are cited merely as curiosities

but the analogy of

w.

:

ler

(BPG, 280 ff.) claims that a year means three months from Adam to Abraham, eight from Isaac to Joseph, and not until after
Rask's scheme (ZHT, 1836, 19 ff.) more complicated, giving to the year the value of one month from Adam to Noah, two from Shem to Serug, four from Nahor
to Terah, six

the time of Joseph twelve.
is still

from Abraham

to

Amram, and twelve

in

and

after

the time of Moses.

V. 5]
that, in his

COMMENTS

179

account of the Flood, the author of the genealogy clearly teaches that the year of this early period See especially viii. 5 ff. consisted of twelve months.
little to be said for the theory that the incomplete, and that therefore the numbers given do not measure the lives of individuals but of groups of persons (Delitzsch) or that the names repreis

There
list

equally
is

of

names

;

sent tribes or dynasties of the antediluvian period (CrawThe construction of the table is such as to show ford).
as it ever contained,* and names was intended to designate an It must therefore be admitted that the auindividual.! thor intended to say, and does say, that there were ten generations, neither more nor fewer, from 'Adham to Noah, and that each of the persons representing them actually lived the given number of years. The first lived

that

it still

has as

many names

that each of these

nine hundred and thirty years. His longevity, surprising in itself, becomes additionally troublesome if one attempt to harmonize it with the sentence pronounced upon him on his expulsion from Paradise (iii. 19). The fact that, as has already been noted, this author ignores the Fall relieves the latter difficulty, at the same time exposing the incorrectness of interpreting then he died here and elsewhere in this chapter as "a standing demonstration of the effect of disobedience
is

"

not death, but an untimely death, that
6.

is

(Murphy). It here regarded

as penal.

The age

at

which Sheth begot

his firstborn

was

* Note the closeness of the articulation; also its conformity to the table in chapter xi., where, 'Abhram included, there are also just ten names.
f

The

theory that the names represent tribes,
is

etc.,

betrays

its

inadequacy as soon as one asks what

meant by the

division into

two components of the number of years assigned to each of them, and what by the sons and daughters who in each case follow the
firstborn.

I8o

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[V. 6-9

a hundred and five years, or twenty-five years earlier than his father begot him. Nor does this fact stand In the next three cases the age at which the first alone.
son
the
8.
is

first

begotten becomes earlier and earlier, and originally nine cases formed a nearly unbroken diminishing

series.*

See below.
is

The same

present text the seriesSee below. increase.

true of the totals, although in the is three times interrupted by an

were
9.

only nine

Thus, all the days hundred and twelve years.
recalls Kayin,

of

Sheth

The name Kenan

but the similarity

between them would hardly have attracted attention if there were no other or clearer parallels between this genealogy and that of the fourth chapter. The fact is that all the names of the latter reappear here, two besides

'Adham
forms.

in the same, the rest in

more or
:

less modified

following table shows to what extent they agree or differ either in form or order
Chapter IV.

The

Chapter V.

Kayin
^

Kenan
-Mahalal'el

'Iradh

Yeredh
Methushelah

Methusha'el

Lemekh
The
similarity

Lemekh
lists is

between the two
is

best explained

by

supposing that one of them

based on the other.

The

prevalent opinion, therefore, is that the names of the second, since they belong to a comparatively late work,
so far as they differ in form or order, are more or less Comp. arbitrary variations upon those of the first.*
*
ter (P), or

The changes may have been made by the author of this chaphe may have found them already made in the genealogy,
iv.

antedating his own, of which

25

f.

2

(J

)

was the beginning.

V. 9-19]

COMMENTS
HB,
it

181

Delitzsch; also Lenormant,
case,
it

185

f.

This being the

is

more probable that Kenan contains a subtle
iv.

reference to

17 than that

connects the son of 'Enosh

with a Sabean divinity (Holzinger).* 12. In the Kayinite genealogy the next name in order was that of Hanokh (iv. 17). In this it is Mahalal'el. Thus, on the supposition that it is a variation upon
Mehiyya'el, the son takes the place of the father of 'Iradh By this change the fifth name (Praise-of-God) (Yeredh).
is

made

to suggest that the first half of the antediluvian

period was characterized by godliness, while that of Hanokh, as will appear, in the seventh place furnishes

the exception to a contrary rule for the last half of the
period, f
15.

The

firstborn of Mahalal'el

was Yeredh, whose

name, lit. Descent^ indicates that he, the first in the second half of the list, marked a turning-point, the beginning of decadence in the history of mankind.
is

In the present text the evidence of the name When, however, as it still does in the Samaritan reading, the record said that Yeredh begot his eldest son at the age of sixty-two, instead of a hun1

8.

unsupported.

dred and sixty-two years, and a computation based
on these and corresponding figures showed that he, as
well as Methushelah and

Lemekh, perished in the Flood, there could be no doubt that the author of the table
meant to represent him as a sinner. Comp. Dillmann. 19. The remnant of Yeredh's years, according to the present text, was eight hundred, for which the Samaritans read seven hundred and eighty-five.
*

The

idea

is

that the author

may have had pp

(kanari),

whence

JP (ken\ nest, in
f For numbers

474, y. a detailed discussion of the significance of the of this table, see Budde,

mind.

Comp. Bottcher,

names and

BU,

93

ff.

\

From TT, go down.

182
20.

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
is

[V. 20-24

ing

The result of the adoption of the Samaritan readthe reduction of the length of Yeredh's life from

forty-seven

nine hundred and sixty-two to eight hundred and In other words, instead of being years. it becomes longer, considerably shorter, than that of any of his progenitors, being cut short, as above intimated,

These figures embody the author's idea of the consequences of the decadence of which Yeredh
by the Flood.
is

the
21.

first

Hanokh begot

representative. his eldest at the normal age of

sixty-five.
22. His subsequent life was brief, but, lest the reader should infer from this fact that he was particularly wicked, it is distinctly stated in this connection that he walked

with God,*
will
(vi. 9),

lived in constant harmony with the divine those three hundred, and probably the pre-

ceding years.
23.

The number three hundred and

sixty-five, re-

presenting the length of Hanokh's life, has its significance, but in this connection it can hardly have been
interpreted as betraying a connection between the patriarch and a solar divinity (Lenormant, } 253 ff.). It

BH

probable that the author, both by giving enth place (Jude 14) and assigning him the
is

him the sevsame number

of years as there are days in the year, desired to indicate that, brief as was his life, it was still in a sense complete.

See viii. 14, according to which the Flood lasted three hundred and sixty-five days.f 24. Hanokh was the first to finish his earthly life, but
* The unnaturalness as well as the ambiguity of
this expression
it

seems to warrant the

belief that in this first instance

has been

substituted for the regular formula lived. See Budde, BU, 170 ff. \ For Wn, the singular, at the beginning of the verse read with

the Samaritans VTP1, the plural.

See also

v. 31.

V. 24-26]

COMMENTS
die.

183

he did not

While he walked with God he

was

not, having suddenly disappeared from the midst of his His disappearance is explained by the brief fellows.

statement that
that, as a

God had taken him
uncommon

reward for his

the idea being piety, the patriarch
;

was graciously delivered from the corruption of his time and translated, as Elijah was afterward (2 Kgs. ii. n), to the immediate society of the Deity. See i. 26 comp.
;

Delitzsch.
but,

The

location of the divine abode

wherever

of

it,

it was, it is not as a good that all

not given, evident that the author thought
is

men had
might by

hopelessly

lost,

but

as one that

some

at least

their virtues gain.

which the Jewish imagination has enriched this scanty record, see the Book

Comp.

iii.

24.

For the

details with

of

Enoch.*
25.

The age

of

Methushelah when

his first son

was

begotten, according to the received text, exceeded, not only the normal limit, but even that at which his grandfather
first

obtained issue.

He

had
old.

lived to

be a hun-

Here, again, the size of the figures creates suspicion with reference to their genuineness, and in this case, as in that of Yeredh, it is necessary to substitute for them the Samaritan,
sixty-seven. 26. In this
case, as in

dred and eighty-seven years

that of Yeredh, the second
first
;

component must be diminished as well as the
after begetting his firstborn

for,

although the received text says that the patriarch lived

seven hundred and eightyis

two

years, the Samaritan reading

six

hundred and

fifty-three.

* The story of Hanokh has a parallel in Babylonian mythology. In the epic of Uruk, however, the person who, with his wife, is

made
244

" like the
is

gods

"

and translated
505
f.

" far

away

to the

mouth

of the
vi. I,

streams,"
ff.;

Ut-napishtim, the hero of the Deluge.

See

KB,

Jastrow,

RBA,

184
27.

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
Thus the
total of his years

[V. 27, 28

was not nine hundred

The sixty-nine, but seven hundred and twenty. latter number harmonizes better than the former with the death of the patriarch by the Flood.*

and

28. The prepaternal component of Yeredh's life was found to be longer than it should be by a hundred years, that of Methushelah by a hundred and twenty years.

That

of

Lemekh

in the received text is

a hundred and

eighty-two years, or a hundred and twenty-nine more than it is in the Samaritan Pentateuch. The antediluvian period as a whole is thus increased from a thousand three hundred and seven to a thousand six hundred and

Why it should have been lengthened at and why by just three hundred and forty-nine years, there is no means of knowing, but the most plausible
fifty-six years.
all,

explanation is that (/) the lives of Yeredh, Methushelah, and Lemekh were lengthened, after the incorporation of

the Shethite with the Kayinite genealogy, for the purpose of making the latter teach, not, as originally, the
gradual deterioration of the race, but the godliness of the Shethites as compared with the Kayinites f and
;

was determined by the next important date, that of the death of Noah, who, according to ix. 28, lived after the Flood three hundred and fifty, or perhaps, according to the reviser, three hundred and forty-nine years.J In distributing the added
(2)

that the

amount

of the increment

* If the original thought was to represent Methushelah as having perished by violence at the comparatively early age of seven hun-

dred and twenty,
lin,

it

is

probable that his name,

lit.

Man-of-the-jave-

to suggest the violence for which the latter part of the antediluvian period is said to have been distinguished (vi. 11).

was intended

f See Budde,
J

BU,

103

ff.

Another suggestion
it

is,

that the

number added was chosen

be-

cause

two

of the years from creation to the Exodus thousand six hundred and sixty-six, or two thirds of four thouthe

made

sum

V. 29]

COMMENTS

185

years the author of the new doctrine naturally gave fewest to the first, and most to the last of the patriarchs

by the change. of Lemekh's son was not mentioned in This variation in phraseology rethe preceding verse. calls iv. 25, and prepares the reader for the parenthetical explanation similar to the one in that passage, and probably by the same author, that follows. The father called This is a his child Noah, saying He will ease * us.
affected
29.

The name

It must, therefore, refer to some prophetic utterance. feature of Noah's character or some event in his subse-

Now in the story of the Flood there quent history. occurs a passage (viil 21) in which Yahweh is represented as so pleased with the sacrifice offered by Noah, when delivered, that he resolves not again to curse the
ground on men's account. The words recall iii. 17, and, although this is not the view usually taken, they may be
interpreted as having reference to a curse like that pronounced upon the ground as a part of the penalty for 'Adham's disobedience. It is probable that the author
of this passage so understood them,

and took the two

words, properly rendered not again, in the possible sense
sand, the

number representing the expected duration

of the world.

See Noldeke, AT, in ff.; Enc. Bib. Art. Chronology, 4; comp. Budde, BU, 106. * The verb is DH3 IV, the first two consonants of which are
(/) it

UK

same as those of Noah. Ball substitutes for it HD because more closely resembles the name in question, and (2) it is the word that seems to be required by the avairavw of the Greek VerBut (/) it is plain from iv. I that in such cases strict corresion. spondence between the terms is not to be expected and (2) it will
the
;

appear on examination that the verb suggested by Ball does not convey the thought that the author evidently wished to express.

The

actual derivation

For various

and significance of the name are theories with reference to it, see Dillmann.

unknown.

i86

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[V. 29-32

of no longer, thus getting the idea that Noah by his piety He therefore makes procured the removal of the curse. Lemekh look for relief through his first-born from the work and the toil occasioned by the stubbornness of

the ground, -which

Yahweh *

hath cursed.

Compare
a predic-

Holzinger, who finds in the words of tion of the discovery of wine by Noah
30.

Lemekh
(ix.

20 ff.).

The remnant

Samaritans, was
five

years, according to the six hundred, but the received text says
of
is

Lemekh's

hundred and ninety-five. 31. The reason for the deduction

apparent.

The

six

hundredth year was that of the Flood,

in which,

therefore, according to the original reading, after a comparatively short life of six hundred and fifty-three years,

he perished. If the number six hundred had been retained, he would still have died in the year of the Flood, at the age of only seven hundred and eighty-two, and the inference would have been the same as in the former The subtraction of five years case, that he was a sinner.

made

his total seven hundred and seventy-seven, a number, suggested perhaps by iv. 24, which, like three hundred and sixty-five, though not large, would be conSee also Mat. xviii. 22. sidered symbolic of completion. 32. The genealogy ends with a notice of the birth of

the three sons of Noah, not, of course, all at once, after he had reached the age of five hundred years. The explanation of the length of this interval is not far to seek. In the first place it was necessary to allow the godly
patriarchs time to finish their lives.

born, Mahalal'el,

When Noah was whose total falls a little short of nine hundred, had five hundred and eighty-three years to live. Hence the postponement of the Flood until Noah's six
hundredth year. If, however, his family had multiplied * The Greek Version adds God.

V.32]
at the rate at

COMMENTS

187

which the race was increasing when he was and for his sake all his house, it would have been necessary to make provision for no fewer than ten generations. On the other hand, if the increase of his family had been entirely suspended, there would
born, to save him,

have been no adequate provision for repeopling the earth Both difficulties were avoided by fixing after the Flood. the dates when he begot his sons after his five hundredth The names of these sons were Shem, Ham, and year.

Yepheth.*
* Thus far only two rescensions of this genealogy have been mentioned, the Hebrew and the Samaritan the latter, according to which it was a thousand three hundred and seven years from
;

Creation to the Deluge, being preferred to the former. There is It difanother, that of the Greek Version, which deserves notice. fers from that of the received text chiefly in that its numbers representing the dates at which the patriarchs begot their first sons, if not already raised, are increased by a hundred, the same being deducted from the numbers representing the length of their subse-

quent

lives.

In the cases of

Lemekh and Methushelah both num-

bers seem to have been further manipulated, the one increased, the The following table exhibits the three systems, other diminished. the Samaritan being taken as the norm and the numbers in which
the others differ from
it being printed in heavy type, that the number and extent of the variations may be readily seen and appreciated.

Firstborn

Remainder

Total

Death-date

S

H

G
205
170

S

H

'Adham
Sheth..r. 'Enosh

130 130 230
105 105

800 800 807 807
815 815

90
70 65

90 190
70 65 165

Kenan
Mahalal'el

840 840 830 830
785

Yeredh

62 162 162
65
65 165

800

Hanokh
Methushelah

300 300
653 782 600 595
45
45

67 187 167

Lemekh Noah

53182188
500500 500
is

This second revision

plausibly lusibly

i88

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[V.

There are those who still find reasons for believing names of this genealogy represent real persons, and that each of these persons actually lived the number See Murphy Dawof years he is reported to have lived. These theses, however, cannot be mainson, EL W, 84.
that the
;

tained, the following considerations being conclusive to the contrary (/) It is the general opinion of physiologists, that the human body is not adapted to bear the strain of more than, at most, two hundred years. See Thorns, HL. 14 ff. (2) There is reliable evidence that,
:

at the close of the period covered
in the region

by this genealogy, and where the patriarchs are supposed to have flourished, the average length of human life was not much, if any, greater than in modern times,* and there is no equally good reason for believing that there were any exceptions so remarkable as these cases would have been, if they had existed, (j) It is incredible that the age of papart of the Alexandrian Jews, not only to restore the symmetry of the table, but to bring the chronology based on it more nearly into

harmony with an increased estimate of the antiquity of man. See Budde, BU, 112. At any rate, the result is the extension of the
antediluvian period from a thousand six hundred and fifty-six to two thousand two hundred and forty-two years. The discovery that, as appears from the table, by this scheme Methushelah lived fourteen years beyond the Flood led to its correction in the

Hebrew

text.

may be inferred from the length of the reigns of a succession of kings as recorded on a Babylonian tablet discovered in 1880. There are eleven of them, the first of whom must have
reigned, at the latest, before the death of Noah (1998 B. c., according to the received chronology), and perhaps before the biblical

* This

date of the Flood (2348 B. c.). The sum of their reigns was only three hundred and five years, the average being less than twenty-

See Hommel, AHT, 1 18 ff. The last eleven kings that ruled France before the Revolution reigned together two hundred and ninety-five, or an average of nearly twenty-seven years.
eight.

V.]

COMMENTS

189

never have fallen below ternity in the direct line should in the case of Noah that and (Heb. sixty-five), sixty-two
the
first

son should not have been born until the father

hundred years old. (4) Finally, granting that the figures of the Greek Version are correct, their sum, two thousand two hundred and forty-two, falls far short of
five

was

expressing the duration of the first period in the history See Le Conte, EG, 618 ff. of mankind. These considerations show that, from the strictly hisIn torical standpoint, the chapter is of little value.
it is a more or less artificial scheme, probably suggested by the list of mythological kings who reigned before the Babylonian Deluge,* by which, in the absence of actual data, the author undertook to connect his doc-

reality

trine concerning the origin of the world with the It is not, however, a historical parts of his narrative.

genealogy, but, as has also been shown, suggests, designed to suggest, ideas that made it of value to those
for
it

more mere and was

whom it was written. Indeed, in its original form contained instruction on all the principal religious quesIt taught tions covered by the two preceding chapters.
the unity of the race.
of sin differed,
it is

Its doctrine respecting the origin

true,

but

it

laid just as great

from that of the third chapter, emphasis on the danger of defy:

number

* There were ten of them also. These are their names, with the of years each reigned, according to Berosus
Aloros
36,00x3
1

Daonos
Euedoreschos

36,000 64,800
36,000 28,800

Alaparos

0,800

Amelon

46,800

Amempsinos
Otiartes

Ammenon
Megalaros

432OO
64,800

Xisuthros

64,800

The

and the duration of the antediSee Cory, AF, 51 ff. On the luvian period, was 432,000 years. ratio between this number and that representing the same period according to the Massoretic text, see Enc. Bib., art. Chronology, 4.
total of their reigns, therefore,

ipo

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[VI.

i

ing or neglecting the will of the Creator. of its patriarchs perish by the Deluge ?

time it taught, by its treatment of the possibility of resisting evil and securing the constant These doctrines favor and protection of the Almighty.

Did not three At the same Hanokh and Noah,

have been somewhat obscured in the course of the history of the chapter but it still retains a religious signifi;

cance, and for this reason deserves the place
in the

it

occupies

Hebrew
fifth

Scriptures.

The
of

chapter brought the story of the development

mankind down to the birth of Shem and his brothers about a hundred years before the Flood. The continuation of that account is found in vi. 9 ff. These two passages from the Priestly narrative are separated by a fragment from another source, like the story of Kayin and Hebhel and the song of Lemekh calculated to prepare the mind of the reader for the terrible visitation by which the race was finally all but annihilated. It treats of
c.

The Apostate Sons

of

God

(vi. 1-8).

date of the episode here narrated is not defiby the original author. Comp. v. 4. It happened when men, the race and not any part of it, as, e.g., the descendants of Kayin as distinguished from those of
i.

The

nitely fixed

Sheth,* had begun to multiply, be numerous, on the face of the ground. Comp. Murphy. At this time daughters, as well as sons, had been born to them. Hitherto the author of this story seems not to have mentioned the birth of a woman, f
*
If,

Comp.

v. 4, etc.

may be the case, since this passage seems to be from the same hand as iv. 17 ff., the descendants of Kayin were originally
as

intended, the author thought of

them as

constituting the entire
iv.

human

family.
22, in

f This favors the view that the last clause of

which

VI. 2]
2.

COMMENTS

191

attention of the

These women, so the author says, attracted the sons of God. The persons here meant

are undoubtedly angels; but the idea that so exalted beings should have paired with human females, especially in view of Jesus' declaration as reported in Mat. xxii. 30,

has offended many interpreters, and they have preferred other interpretations. Thus, some have held that the sons of God were sons of the mighty of the time (Rashi) ; others that they were the righteous, or the Shethites

(Murphy)
first

:

but *he evidence
(/)

is all in

favor of the opinion

mentioned.

The phrase
i.

"

sons of

God

"

in

the

Old Testament invariably means the attendants of the 26 and iii. 22 are supposed to heavenly court, to whom See Job i. 6 ii. I xxxviii. 7 Ps. xxix. I Ixxxix. refer. the occurrence, 6. (2) The belief in the possibility, and of intermarriages between divine and human beings was
; ; ; ;

miliar.

once almost universal. The classical instances are faFor a Shemitic parallel, see Ishtar's proposal to

Gilgamesh (Schrader, KB, vi. i. i66ff. Jastrow, RBA, 48 1 ff.). ( J) The New Testament expressly identifies the See 2 Pet. ii. 4 ff. Jude 6. sons of God with angels. This interpretation is further supported by such an(<f)
;

;

cient authorities as- the

Book
of

of

Enoch, the Book of Jubi-

the Twelve Patriarchs, Philo, lees, the Testaments of the and most Josephus, early Christian Fathers.* Book of Adam and Eve, iii. 4. the Compare, however, It was angels, then, who saw that the daughters of

men were
ities

fair, and, being smitten by the external qualthat appeal to the senses, took to themselves as wives whomsoever they chose, without leave asked or

Na'amah

is

mentioned,

is

an addition to the original
is

text.

See

Budde, BU, 141 ff. * According to Tertullian there
in
i

a reference to this passage

Cor.

xi. 10.

192

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
The
author does not see
fit

[VI. 3

granted.

to explain

what

form they wore
ever, xviii. 8, etc.

in their conjugal relations.

See, how-

3. At this point the natural order, which would require a statement concerning the issue of the marriages thus contracted, is interrupted by the introduction of a decree of Yahweh. The spirit of Yahweh in this connection is probably synonymous with the breath of the Almighty, the source of all animate existence (Job xxxiii. but

4)

;

it

may, as Wellhausen (CH, 305

reference to the

new

suggests, have special infusion of the divine which the
f.)
it

race had received through the angels. Whatever it is not to abide* in men, lit. man, forever.
addition of the last word furnishes a clue to the
of the term men.
It

is,

The
;

meaning

can hardly denote individuals for Yahweh has already settled it that the life of the individual shall not endure indefinitely. See iii. 19, 22ff.f It must, therefore, be the race as a whole that is threat-

ened with a termination of its existence. The reason It probgiven, since they also are flesh, J is obscure.
* This is the uniform rendering of the Versions but * whether it can be gotten out of the Massoretic text is doubtful. Hence it has been suggested that for ]VP (here only) there be substituted
;

YTh (Hgen), -JlV* (Kuenen), or \\3^ (Ball). Others, retaining the present reading, render the verb strive (E. V.), rule (Delitzsch), or be abased (Dillmann). See also Berry, JSL, xvi. 47 ff. f If, as Budde (BU, 44) claims, this verse originally immediately
preceded iii. 23, the term men must then have denoted individuals but since a decree again limiting the life of the individual would have been as superfluous there as here, there is little probability that the passage ever formed a part of the third chapter.
;

J

This on the supposition that the correct reading

is

2atZ?2
is

lit.

in that also (Ginsburg).

The more common

reading

D2t?2>
Ball

which

is

rendered in their (the angels') error (Dillmann).
it

(Addenda) explains

as originating in dittography of the follow-

VI. 3]

COMMENTS

193

that men are of a lower order than the sons and that therefore an intermixture of the two is The last clause fixes a defiunnatural and intolerable. nite limit beyond which it will not be permitted their days shall be a hundred and twenty years. If the

ably

means

of God,

:

interpretation just given to the first half of the verse is correct, such a declaration can only mean that the figures

here used measure the further existence of the race. This view is not generally accepted, but it is supported by weighty considerations (/) It is the one required by The author of this verse would the immediate context. not have considered the abbreviation of human life an expedient calculated to undo the mischief wrought by the
:

sons of God.
in its present

(2)

Since, as already intimated, the story,

setting, was evidently intended to explain and justify the Deluge, the penalty threatened must be the destruction of mankind by that catastrophe. The most plausible objection is that, between the birth

form and

in Noah's five hundredth and the Flood in his hundredth year there is not room for the given inbut this is invalidated by the fact that, as terval (Tuch) has already been explained, vi. 1-8 is not a continuation of chapter v., and therefore must not be expected to harmonize with it.* The early authorities, Jewish and Christian, then, were correct in regarding this third verse as a

of

Shem

six

;

ing Htt?Hin the

The

C? for ntZ7S is late

principal objection to the first interpretation is that Hebrew, or Aramaic, and therefore not in place
is

Pentateuch (Dillmann); but (/)the lateness of IP disputed (Moore on Jud. v. 7), and (2) if it is late, so in
bility is this verse.

not un-

all

proba-

Comp. Budde. * A similar mistake is made when, in arguing against the view that the number a hundred and twenty is the measure of the individual

human

life,

the cases of

Abraham, Sarah,
is

etc.,

are cited

;

since the data on which the objection Comp. Delitzsch. Priestly narrative.

based

all

come from the

194

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
Flood and
its

[VI. 3-5

prediction of the

terrible consequences.

Comp. Dillmann. The respite was naturally explained as an evidence of the longsuffering of God (i Pet. iii. 20) and an opportunity for Noah to preach righteousness
to the
4.

ungodly

(2 Pet.
v.

ii.

5).

The

author of

of the sons of

follows there is no trace of conLike the account of Lemekh's departure from monogamy (iv. igff.) and that of l^oah's discovery of wine (ix. 20 ff.), it is a passionless record of an inter* It says that the giants were, peresting tradition. haps arose, in those days. These words in themselves

statement that

God now

3 evidently condemned the course as wicked and calamitous. In the

demnation.

would not connect the giants with the sons of God as their offspring, but the clause when the sons of God came to the daughters of men has no significance unless it establishes such a relation.! These giants were the heroes, men of might and prowess, who, by their achievements, of old had become the men of renown. In other words they corresponded to the demigods of
classical
5.

mythology.

Toward the end of the appointed interval Yahweh saw that the wickedness of men, stimulated by the
lawlessness of the sons of God, was great in the earth, that, indeed, every design of the thoughts of their

hearts, as expressed in their conduct, was only and always evil. In such a case specifications become superfluous. * The derivation of the word so rendered, D^bo is uncertain, but the meaning is clear from Num. xiii. 33, where, however, the sons of-Anakfrom the giants is a gloss. See the Greek Version. t The phrase and also after-ward might be explained as referring to the interval between the date of the first intermarriages and that of the Flood (Delitzsch), but it is more probably an interpolation suggested

by Num.

xiii.

33 (Budde).

VI. 6-8]
6.

COMMENTS
effect

195

upon Yahweh is described in picturesque anthropomorphisms from which the unsophisti-

The

cated reader cannot fail to get a vivid impression of the extent of the corruption that prevailed. First, he was sorry that he had made men at all, and his grief over

waywardness went to his heart. This 7. feeling finally gave way to anger, and he deI will clared, wipe men off the face of the ground.* 8. But one was found worthy of being excepted from
their
this stern decision.

hereafter

(vii.

i),

Noah, for a reason that will appear found favor in the eyes of Yahweh.

The

" sons of story of the

God "

in its natural

and

necessary interpretation has been a stumbling-block to many devout readers of the Scriptures. One who has studied the preceding chapters in the light of recent oriental discoveries, however,

and noted the traces of

foreign,

especially Babylonian, influence therein contained, will not be greatly surprised at finding here a decidedly mythNor will it disturb his reverence for ological coloring.

the Old Testament as a whole, or his appreciation of this particular passage for he will have noted that, although
;

the reality of the gods and demigods of the gentiles is here taken for granted, they are presented in such a light as to prevent the thoughtful' Hebrew from placing them

on an equality with the Holy One of Israel, and he will contemplate with growing admiration the moral insight

fore,

men with whom Yahweh is angry. They alone, thereshould be threatened with destruction. In the present text, however, animals of all sorts share in the divine displeasure. The discrepancy has been produced by the insertion of a list of specifications, proper enough after such an expression as allflesh but not
It is

*

after

men, to bring this verse more nearly into accord with vii. 21 and other like passages from a different source (P). The clause whom I have created, also, is an interpolation.

196

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[VI.

9,

10

that enabled the author so clearly to perceive the rottenness of the foundation of the ethnic religions.

The

central figure in the rest of this
is

and the next three

the patriarch Noah. The whole may therefore appropriately be discussed under the title

chapters

3.

NOAH AND

HIS

TIMES

(vi.

9-ix. 29),

the proper equivalent for the generations of this connection.

Noah

in

The greater part of the narrative posite account of
a.

is

devoted to a com-

The Deluge
falls into

(vi.

9-ix. 17)

;

which naturally
with
(i)

three sections, the

first

dealing
It is

THE PREPARATIONS OF NOAH
of

(vi.

9-vii. 5).

composed parts, each of which recounts the steps taken by the patriarch under the divine direction to save
himself and his family from destruction by the Flood. (a) The First Account (vi. 9-22), derived from the
Priestly narrative,

two

seems

to

have been incorporated into

the text entire.
9. It begins with a statement with reference to the character of Noah, declaring that he was a just,* a perfect man, and therefore conspicuous among his fellows,
lit.

in his generations.

Like Hanokh

(v.

22) he

also

walked with God. 10. The author does
whose
birth

not say that his three sons,

in v. 32, were as remarkable for their piety as their father, but he probably thought of them as having profited the patriarch's

was recorded

by

example.

Comp.

ix.

i8ff. (J).

* The Samaritans connect p'H^/wj/', which Ball is inclined to pronounce a gloss borrowed from vii. i, with Q^on perfect, by a 1 and.

VI. n-14]

COMMENTS

197

11. Not so the rest of mankind; for the earth, here put for its inhabitants, in spite of his piety became corThe prevalent corruption showed rupt, morally ruined. itself in violence, disregard of the rights of one's fel-

lows, the prevailing sin of godless ages
12.

and communities.

The corruption described was not confined to mankind. The lower animals learned to hunt and devour one another. Comp. Strack. Thus all flesh had finally perverted
its

way, changed the course

of nature

and tem-

porarily defeated the benevolent purpose of the Creator. He says 13. God was not slow to discover a remedy.

to Noah,

The

flesh

hath come before me.

end, the destruction (Am. viii. i), of all He has set it before him-

self as
etc.

an object to be accomplished.

Comp. Am.

ix. 4,

purposes to destroy them, the individuals responsible for the state of things described, and* the earth or, as the sequel shows, destroy them and devas;

He

tate the earth, f 14. Thus far there has

been no intimation with reference to the means by which mankind are to be destroyed. It now appears that it is to be done by water, for God instructs Noah to build an ark, i. e. as in Ex. ii. 3, a box that will float on the water. J It is to be made of a wood
t

* With the Greek Version, the original of which seems to have had nSI instead of the ns> with, of the present Hebrew text. The
Syriac has

br

on.

f It is interesting to note that the

word nntP> here used

in the

sense of destroy,

and pervert. be produced in English by using pervert throughout and subvert for the penalty.

that appeared above in that of corrupt If a paronomasia was intended, a similar effect could
is

the

same

for the offence

J The fact that Noah is represented as escaping by a box, and not, like the hero of the Babylonian deluge, in a ship or houseboat, has been supposed to indicate that the Hebrew story originated in-

land

;

but

it is

quite as probable that the author

by the term here

198

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
;

[VI.

14,

15

whose identity is in dispute probably cypress, which was anciently very common in western Asia, and was much used by the Egyptians for coffins and by the Phoenicians in shipbuilding. See Tristram, NffB, 356. Comp.
W, 1898, 163 f. The ark is to be constructed Cheyne, in cells,* doubtless for the accommodation of the various species of animals and their subsistence and the seams
;

ZA

stopped by smearing it outside and in with bitumen, the mineral pitch which is found in large quantities in both Palestine (xiv. 10) and Mesopotamia (xi. 3).
15.

Noah

also receives instructions with reference to

the size of the ark.

hundred
of

cubits.

The length prescribed is three The Hebrews seem to have had cubits

two different lengths, the one a handbreadth longer than the other (Eze. xl. 5). If the cubit here meant was the longer of the two, and, as there are reasons for sup" " posing, approximately identical with the royal cubit of
the Babylonians,
inches.
it measured about 495 millimetres or See Benziger, HA, art. Elle ; comp. 19.49 Riehm. The length of the ark would thus be 148.5 metres or 487.2 feet. Its breadth, fifty cubits, in modern terms would be 24.75 metres or 81.2 feet, and its

height, thirty cubits, 14.85 metres or 48.72 feet.f

used meant to intimate that unknown.
*
ever,

in the time of the patriarch ships

were

Lagarde suggests the insertion of a second Mpi which, howwould only emphasize the idea expressed by the present text.

The Babylonian Noah
ments.

See Schrader,

KB,

divided his ship into sixty-three compartvi. i. 232 ff. ; Appendix, 11. 62 ff.

f The largest modern steamships (600-700 ft.) are much longer than the ark, but, since they are not nearly so wide or deep, they have not an equal capacity (1,927,394.38 cu. ft.). The " Great Eastern," however, surpassed it in all three dimensions, being 680 On the dimensions of feet long, 82.5 feet wide, and 58 feet deep.

the Babylonian ark, see Johns in The Expositor for April, 1901.

VI.

i6, 17]

COMMENTS

199

Provision for light and air is to be made by finnot a window (Dillmann), but the ark ishing it
1 6.

within a cubit of the top, thus leaving an opening a cubit wide around the entire vessel under the roof.* The in the side of only door in the structure is to be placed
the ark.
tally

Finally the interior
if

is

to be divided horizon-

by

floors

making a lower, a second, and a third
equal in height, being about six-

story, each of them, teen feet high.f
17.

Having
in

announces

finished this description of the ark, so many words that he will bring

God
the

Flood, \ so called in anticipation of the prominence to be given to it by mankind, upon the earth, or that

His purpose it not already covered with water. the destruction, with the exception hereafter to be made, of all land life. That there may be no doubt about his meaning, he defines the phrase all flesh by in which
part of
is

a living spirit, and then employs, whole thought, the familiar Hebrew
is

to emphasize the device, repetition:

It also the natural interpretation of the present text. There is therefore no necessity for importing from the Arabic a meaning (roof} for "in^ or recasting nnS-bs> to a cubit thou shalt finish it, into HDIS-bs*
is

* This seems to

suit the context.

rabm
n3D3n
f

The

The

thou shalt cover it. Comp. Ball. would thus be 118,681.92 square feet. question whether a vessel answering to the dimensions here
to its length

entire floor-space

given would accommodate the cargo for which it was designed, is of importance only to those who feel obliged to insist that the story
of the Flood
is in all its details

Babylonian legend had seven 232 f. Appendix, 1. 62.
;

stories.

authentic history. The ship of See Schrader, KB, vi. i,

water, of the present text appears to be a gloss on the perhaps unfamiliar term b*QE> Flood. For the nnttfb of the received text the Samaritans read rvntrb
J

The word D^E

or

rvniPnb*

On
1

the latter form, see Ges.

53, 3,

R

7

;

on the

construction,

14, 2,

R

4.

200
all

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
that
is in

[VI. 17-20

This, of course, implies a universal deluge. 1 8. The decree consigning to destruction the corrupt mass of mankind is immediately followed by a token of

the earth, he

says, shall perish.

God's satisfaction with the patriarch
enter into,
enant,

:

I will establish,

covenant with thee. This covhowever, though made with Noah alone, is to

my,

i.

e.,

a,

affect the fortunes of his entire family

;

for the com-

(and promise) reads, thou shalt go into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and the wives of thy sons with thee.* For his sake God proposes to 19. Nor is this all.

mand

provide for the perpetuation of all the beasts, f in this case all the varied species of the animal world. To this

end the patriarch
20.

is

instructed to bring into the
of each kind.

ark a

male and a female
birds,

Three classes of animals are enumerated, the the cattle, and} all, the multitude of, the creeping things. The author seems to have felt that
to

the term used in the preceding verse made it unnecessary make express mention of "the beasts of the earth."
is

In v. 19 Noah the ark; here
if,

commanded to bring the animals into God says they shall come to him, as
is
still

scenting danger, and, as
*

their habit, seeking
that

The

idea of Valeton

(ZAW,

1892,

7),

the covenant

here proposed is the same as that of chapter ix., is clearly mistaken. This is made with Noah as a pledge of his escape from the impending deluge that, with him and his descendants after the
;

Flood, as security against the recurrence of such a calamity.
ix.

See

9 if.

of the received text.

with the Samaritans, instead of the Tin* living thing, See viii. 17; comp. iii. 20; viii. 21. t This is the Greek, the Syriac, and the Samaritan reading the received text omits the connective.
t
;

rPnn

VI. 20-VII. 2]

COMMENTS

201

human protection, they would be kept alive.*

take refuge with him, to

21. Noah, for his part, has to provide for their sustenance, as well as his own, by collecting an indefinite quantity of every food that is eaten. 22. The patriarch, being "a perfect man," his obedience to the divine will, did just as

exact in

God had

commanded

him,

(b) The Second Account (vii. 1-5), which is of YahThe part that dealt wistic origin, is but a fragment.

with the ark and

its

construction, with which

it

doubtless

once began, and by which it was connected with vi. 8, has been omitted, probably because it would have been a
14-16. present form it assumes that the ark has It begins as if the command already been completed. in vi. 1 8 had not already been given and the persons
1.

mere

repetition of
its

vi.

In

affected

by

it

enumerated.

Yahweh

mark the name

for the Deity

says to Noah, Come thou, and all thy house, into the ark. There is no reference to a covenant made or proposed, but the reason given by Yahweh
for his

command, thee have I found righteous before

me

in this generation, amounts to the recognition of an obligation to reward the patriarch for his exceptional
piety.
2.

Thus

far,

therefore, there

is

between the two accounts.

The

practical agreement instructions now given

with reference to the animals differ from those of the first account first, in making a distinction among them
:

;

and second, in adding to the number to be taken from one of the classes thus distinguished. Thus, a part of * The emphasis on the subject in v. 20 favors this interpretation.

202

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[VII.

2,

3

the animals are characterized as clean, i. e., as appears viii. 20, suitable for sacrifices to the Deity as well This as for food for mankind, viz., sheep, goats, etc.

from

which is not surprising in the present connection, the teaching of the Yahwist being that the use of animals for the purposes mentioned was an immedistinction

would have been out of (iii. 21; iv. 4) in the other account, since, according to the Priestly place
narrator, animals
after the Flood

morial custom

were not
(i.

slain for either

purpose until

Of these clean animals 29; Noah is directed to take by sevens. The meaning of this phrase is disputed. The more natural interpretation makes it mean, not seven pairs (Dillmann), but seven individuals of each species, or three pairs of a male and
ix. 3).

his mate,* to secure a comparatively rapid restoration of these useful species, and an odd male for the sacrifice

by which the patriarch
(viii.

is

to celebrate his deliverance

20).

This view

is

favored by the fact that, in the

latter half of the verse,

by twos

f evidently

means a

single pair of each species. 3. The phraseology of the

received text might be

the species of birds are to be represented in the ark by sevens but viii. 20 makes it evident that this was not the author's idea, and there
interpreted to
that
all
;

mean

is

good authority for believing that the original reading was, of the clean birds of heaven by sevens, and of
all
*

the birds that are not clean

by twos.!

The

disin

Compare a male and a female, the expression used by P

vi. 19.

D > 3C27

present text has D^tfr two, but the Samaritan reading is and it is supported by the Greek and Syriac versions. t The reading clean birds is supported by the Greek, Syriac, and Samaritan texts but, if this is genuine, the Greek Version is doubtt

The

D'OICS

:

less correct in

adding the parallel clause prescribing the number of unclean birds to be admitted to the ark.

VII. 3-5]

COMMENTS
between clean and unclean
it

203

tinction

was as important
;

to notice in connection with the birds as with the cattle

but

was not necessary to repeat the requirement that Noah should select alternately a male and a female.
it

It is

therefore probable that this phrase, which, more(vi.

over, is in the later style of the Priestly narrator
is

19),

an interpolation.* The expression the whole earth shows that the Yahwist also thought of the deluge as

universal.
4. Yahweh gives his servant seven days in which to bestow the animals and the food necessary for their sustenance in the ark. At the end of that time, he says, he intends to cause a rain, in itself not a remarkable phe-

nomenon, by which, owing to its duration, forty days and forty nights, he will wipe all his creatures off the face of the earth. The idea of the author evidently is that, at the end of that time, the work of destruction having been completed, the deluge will cease. See v. 17 viii. 6 comp. v. 24 viii. 3 f 5. This verse is only a less formal duplicate of vi 21.
;

;

;

.

When all things were finally in readiness, God sent Much of the rest of the deluge, as he had threatened. the story is devoted to
(2)

THE WATER OF THE FLOOD

(vii.

6-viii. 14)

:

the

havoc wrought by it and the experiences of Noah while it covered the earth. Here, too, the narrative is composite, but the extracts of which it is composed are too brief to be treated as separate paragraphs. The only further division that seems warranted is based on the phenomena From this point of the rise and subsidence of the water. of view there are two sections, the first of which describes
* In the Samaritan Pentateuch this idiom has been substituted
in v. 2 for that preserved in the Massoretic text.

204
(a)

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[VII. 6-9
It

A

Destructive Prevalence

(vii.

6-24).

6.

opens

with a statement of the age of Noah, six hundred years, when the Flood occurred. This statement clearly belongs to the chronological scheme, original with the Priestly narrator, which ran through the preceding chapters
7.

and furnishes a framework for the present story. This general statement was originally followed by

the precise date of the beginning of the deluge in v. 1 1. In the present composite narrative the connection be-

tween the two

is

interrupted,

first,

by a notice

of the

embarkation of Noah and his family anticipating a more detailed account of the same incident in vv. 12-16. The words, And Noah went into the ark on account of, through fear of, the water of the Flood, are attributed
to the

Yah wist
v. i.

;

the rest

is

probably editorial elaboration.

Comp.
8.

also,

The description of the embarkation of the animals, being intended to harmonize vv. 2 f. with vi. 19, is of editorial origin. It recognizes the distinction between
v. 3,

the clean and the unclean, but, following apply it to the birds as well as the cattle.*
9.

omits to

It is

would follow

not probable that the author of the last verse vv. 2 f. so closely as he has thus far and

contradict that passage before he finished the sentence. Hence one must conclude that in this verse by twos
refers,

went
in

into the ark, but to the

not to the number of each species of animal that number that went abreast

the procession.

Perhaps

and the addition of a
to favor this view
v.

male and a female seems

the

author also interpreted by sevens in
* For bD1> and
latter,

3

as

meaning

the

all, the Samaritans read bl3E1> and of all, and being the more natural and having the support of the Greek and Syriac versions, is doubtless the correct reading.

V11

.

9- 1 1 ]
pairs.

COMMENTS
The
last clause,

205

seven
10.

with

Jahweh,*

naturally

attaches

itself to v. ?.f

At

the end of the

his final preparations
in the ark (v. 7),

seven days granted Noah for when he had taken refuge the water of the Flood was, began
(v. 4),
;

the threatened rain set in. now resumes his precise and author Priestly See v. 6. The detailed description of the embarkation. month, the second, and even the day, the seventeenth, J
to be,
11.

on the earth

The

on which the Flood began are carefully noted. The Hebrew year originally began in the fall; and, since
the author elsewhere (Ex. xii. 2) distinctly attributes the change in the method of reckoning to Moses, he would the naturally reckon from Tishri in the period preceding

The second Kgs. vi. 38), later Marheshwan, beginning about the middle of October; so that the seventeenth of the month would come about the first of November, when the rainy season in Palestine and the
advent of the lawgiver.

Comp. Gunkel.

month would thus be Bui

(i

On that day neighboring countries usually sets in. all the sluices of the great deep, the openings by
* This
is

the Samaritan reading and
of the

it is

supported by the Tar-

gum and the Vulgate. f Some manuscripts
of the

Greek Version have the equivalent

pronoun him instead of the name Noah, and, when the clause was attached to v. 7, the former may have been the Hebrew
reading.

According to the Greek Version it was the twenty-seventh. Priestly narrator always omits the word DV day, when the on Lev. xxiii. 5, see number is ten or less, but always inserts it with a larger number. Hence the Greek and Samaritan reading the question here is, whether the translators mistook 0** ""11P27 for
J

The

D'HttJS?' or

a later copyist omitted the terminal
to defy solution.

DN

in C*> Q^"1273?

5

and

it

seems

The

following table, copied from the author's

Amos,

furnishes

206

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
;
;

[VII. 11-13

which the Hebrews represented the "water under the " (Ex. xx. 4 Ps. xxiv. 2 Am. vii. 4) as brought to the surface, were rent open, suddenly and violently enlarged, perhaps multiplied, to emit an unprecedented volume of water. There is no reference to a tidal wave
earth
or

any similar phenomenon.

Comp. Dawson,

EL W,

94.

of heaven, the openings in the solid expanse by which God had divided the primeval watery waste (i. 6), were undone, to empty the water of

In addition the

windows

the celestial reservoir upon the earth. 12. With the foregoing description, which makes the

Flood an immediate miracle, compare the simple and the rain it the earth on and /. was, e., rained, forty days forty
characteristic statement of the Yahwist, that

nights.* 13. In vv. 7 and 10 the idea seems to be that Noah embarked before the date set for the beginning of the Here the Priestly narrator says that the patriFlood.

arch waited until the last moment, entering the ark

on

that very day, he and
:

his family

with him.f

a correct idea of the limits as well as the character of the rainy season in Palestine
Months

VII. 14-iS]
14.

COMMENTS
all

207

Moreover, he appears to teach that
day.

the beasts,

cattle, creeping things and birds

were put aboard the
from

same
15.
all

They came by twos,

in pairs, of all flesh,*

the species without exception.! 1 6. All this did Noah, as God had
in.

commanded him

;

and Yahweh shut him
a Yahwistic fragment.

The

last clause is evidently

If so, however, it must originally have preceded v. 10, where the storm is represented as having already begun. It naturally attaches itself to the

last clause of v. 9.
17. The next clause is usually interpreted as a reiteration of the substance of vv. 10 and 12, the phrase forty a The " dreadful mo-

harmonistic addition. J notony (Delitzsch) thus produced can, and should, be relieved by referring the whole clause to the compiler,

days being
"

and interpreting the forty days as the measure, not of
the duration of the Flood, as it is naturally understood in v. 12, but of the length of the first stage in the rise
of the water.

The meaning
is

of the verse hi its present

form, therefore,

that,

forty days of v. 1 2, depth that it lifted
1 8.

when the Flood had lasted the the water had increased to such a the ark off the earth.
parallel

The

Priestly
in

to
it

three verses.

For increased
volume,

i/b occupies the next has prevailed, grew in
greatly.

power as well as
*

and increased

"lEO* flesh, in the received text is contrary to the usage of this writer (vi. 12, 17, 19), and should be omitted. So the Samaritans. f The Babylonian Noah took with him into his ship, besides his
article before

The

family and relatives, cattle and beasts of the field and artisans of all sorts. See Schrader, KB, vi. I, 234 f. Appendix, 11. 85 ff. J Budde (BU, 262 ff.), however, explains DV C'TmS as a cor;

ruption of C^E' water. On the construction, see

v.

3; Ges.

in,

R

3.

208

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[VII. 19-23

19. These are strong terms, yet they do not seem to the author adequately to describe the mighty volume of The water, he declares, prethe destroying element.

vailed very greatly, surpassed all bounds, so that all the high, i. e., highest mountains, not only in the region in which Noah had lived, but under all heaven, were

covered, completely submerged.
20.

Comp.
nor was

Delitzsch.
its

And

still

the water rose
it

;

all-engulfing

had reached the height of fifteen cubits farther upward, and the mountains, even the highest, were covered to that depth. Thus it was possible for the ark, which seems to have had a draft of
increase checked until

about fifteen cubits
peaks.
21.
plete.

(viii.

4),

to float over the highest

The

destruction wrought was world-wide and com-

moved on the earth perished, not only the animals of every sort, but all mankind. 22. The Yah wist tells the same story in other words.
All flesh that

Every

thing, he says, in
life *
(ii.

whose

nostrils
i.

was

the

breath of
23.

7)

on the dry land,

e.,

exclusive

of the fishes, died.

Thus, adds the same writer, Yahwehf wiped vii. 4 he threatened to do, all the beings that were on the face of the ground. An editorial hand has amplified this statement by inserting details borrowed from the Priestly narrative, as in vi. 7, and repeating, they were wiped off the earth. The Yahwist conout, as in
text has Q^n ntt?3 the breath of the spirit a combination of the original reading, D^H n?2tt?> the breath of life (ii. 7), with the corresponding Priestly expression, D^n the spirit of life (vi. 17).

*

The received

nn

of

life,

rm

divine name is wanting in the received text, probably through the carelessness of a copyist. Comp. Budde (BU, 266), who supposes the compiler to have omitted it for some unknown
\

The

reason.

VII. 23-VIII.

i.]

COMMENTS
Noah and

209

eludes this part of his story with the words,

were

left

only

and there those that were with him

in the ark.*
24. The statement with which the Priestly narrator closes this part of his description of the Flood has been When he says that the water premisinterpreted.

vailed for a certain length of time, he does not mean that it remained at or above a given height (Murphy) during that period. In vv. 18-22 prevail denotes increase in power with increase in volume, a"hd there is no
warrant for giving
nection.
it

a different signification in this con-

Indeed, the fact that, according to this author, the sluices of the deep and the windows of heaven were

not closed until the end of the given period (viii. 2 f.) makes it necessary to conclude that he here intends to

say that the height reached by the water was reached by a continuous rise lasting a hundred and fifty days. See also i/a, the insertion of which can only be explained

on

this supposition.

The

rise just described finally

reached

its

limit

and

was followed by (b) A Gradual Subsidence

I. The turning(viii. 1-14). to the was reached narrator, Priestly point, according remembered Noah, and his covenant to when

God

save the patriarch and the remaining occupants of the ark.f Then he caused a wind to pass over the earth, and as a result the water fell, or, strictly speaking, be-

gan to

fall.

See Ex.

xiv. 2

1

;

Num.

xii.

3

1

(J).

* See Budde (BU,

267).

Dillmann refers the clause
;

to

A

(P),

while Holzinger (Gen.) pronounces it composite but its brevity and simplicity show that neither of these views is tenable.
f

The

Syriac Version adds the birds, and the Greek both them
things.

and the creeping

210

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[VIII. 2-4

2. The wind, however, would have been ineffectual, had not the sources of the inundation been stopped. The writer therefore adds that, at the same time, the sluices of the deep and the windows of heaven were closed. The Yahwist seems not to have known of the miraculous

accounts for the subsidence of the water by simply noting that the rain from heaven, by which the deluge was caused, ceased.
wind.

He

He then proceeds to say that, from that time, 3. which, as appears from vii. 12, was at the end of forty days from the beginning of the Flood, the "water continually withdrew. This was the thought of the Yahwist but the Priestly narrator consistently dated the
;

* beginning of the subsidence from the end of a hundred and fifty days, and his view is here adopted by the compiler.
this long and anxious period God had not his servant. While the water was rising forgotten really he was steering the ark to the spot where it would soonest find anchorage. The result was that in the seventh
4.

During

month, on the seventeenth f of the month,

or, if one reckon thirty days to the month, as this author seems to have done, on the very day the water began to subside, the ark grounded. The place thus divinely selected

was

in the mountains, not the mountain, of 'Ararat, the Urartu of the Assyrians, a country lying on the T Araxes (Aras) east of Lake Van. See Schrader, 52 f. Die. Bib., art. Ararat. Among the mountains of

KA

y

;

that region
is

is

one, called

commonly

identified with that

by the Armenians Massis, which on which the ark rested.

* For nSp> read ^p> the proper form of the word meaning end in temporal clauses. So the Samaritans, here and in Deu. xiv. 28. See also xvi. 3 (P). f Here, as in vii. n, the Greek Version has the twenty-seventh.

VI 1 1. 4-6]

COMMENTS

21

1

It is nearly 17,000 feet high, and consequently covered It has a rival in Mt. Judi, in Kurwith perpetual snow. of Lake southwest distan, Van, which is favored by

tains here

Wherever the mounmeant were, they were evidently the highest with which the author was acquainted, and, in his view,
orientals,

both Jew and Christian.*

the highest in existence.
stage in the decrease of the water was in the tenth month, on the first of the completed when the tops of the mountains, these highmonth,f
5.

The

first

est,

including the one on which the ark lay, appeared.

Taken strictly, this would mean that the water fell a little more than fifteen cubits in about seventy-four days. 6. There follows a verse whose original meaning is
clear.

It

is

The forty days,
and
12,

evidently from the hand of the Yahwist. therefore, must originally, as in vii. 4
;

have been the forty days of the storm

the idea
of

of the author being, that opened the the ark as soon as the rain ceased. Comp.

Noah

window

Lenormant,

In its present setting it means something 414. entirely different. The forty days would naturally be interpreted as the next forty after the date last mentioned,

BHj

* For an account of an ascent of Mt. Ararat, see Allen & SachtAAB, 43 ff. The identification of the place where Noah landed with Mt. Judi is supported by the authority of the Targum and the Syriac Version. Berosus in his version of the Babylonian account of the Flood, also, represents Xisuthros as landing in the
leben,

region of the latter. See Cory, AF, 63. The original, however, says that the ship in which he was saved grounded on Nisir, a mountain elsewhere described as beyond the Tigris between the

See Schrader, KB, Die. Bib., art. Ararat. t The Greek translators seem to have understood until the tenth month as meaning until the end of it ; hence they changed the date
thirty-fifth

and
;

thirty-sixth parallel of latitude.

vi. i,

238

ff.

KAT,

53; Appendix,

1.

141

;

of the appearance of the mountains to the

first

of the eleventh

month.

See

ii.

2.

212

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
first of

[VIII.

6,

7

must have been the seems strange that, if the mountains, including the one on which the ark lay, were already visible at the beginning of the period, the dove should not have found a resting-place when released at the end of it (v. 9).* There is no other interpretation to which there are not equally serious objections. Thus, if the forty days be reckoned from the seventeenth of the seventh month (Dillmann), even on the supposition that the first dove was not released until seven days after the raven, the second will have brought the olive branch
the
;

the tenth month

and

this

idea of the compiler, although

it

Noah twenty (74 mountains were visible.
to

54) days before the tops of the

The

clause that

he had made,

of course, refers, not to the ark, but to the window, of the oriental pattern, in it.f Comp. vi. 16.
7.

It

roof, so that

has been suggested that the window was in the Noah could not see his surroundings (Budde),
this is the reason
;

and that
tion.

messengers

A

he employed the birds as his seems unfavorable to this supposimore probable explanation is, that he wished a
but
v.

13

larger knowledge of the situation than his own eyes could To this end, according to the text, he first give him.

a raven, one of the strongest of wing and keeneye among his feathered companions. But the bird, being comparatively wild, and able to subsist on the carrion which still floated on the water, went to and
sent out
est of
is relieved by the fact that, in the Babylonian two birds return to the ship without finding a restingplace, although Mt. Nisir had appeared as an island a week before the first of them had been sent forth. See Schrader, KB, vi. I,

* This difficulty
first

story the

11. 140 ff. definiteness of the expression does not necessarily indicate that this window was the only one in the ark (Dillmann). The article is used in the sense of a certain to designate a person or

238
t

ff.

;

Appendix,

The

object as the one in the author's mind.

See

v. 7;

Ges.

126, 4.

VIII.

7,

8]

COMMENTS

213

fro continually,* never coming back to the ark, until the water dried off the earth and its mate also was
released.
8.

The

natural inference
is,

between w. 6 and 7
question,

that the raven was set free

diately after the rain

from the close connection immehad ceased. It now becomes a

how long Noah waited for the return of the raven before he despatched his second messenger, a dove. This verse, in its present form, contains no information on the subject a fact which, in view of the care
:

with which the rest of the story (vv. 10, 12) is articulated, seems significant. It has been explained by saying that, either by accident or design, a temporal clause that once
this verse has been omitted.f This, however, is better not the only explanation that suggests itself. one is based on the supposition that the verse is the

began

A

original continuation of v. 6;

a supposition supported

* The Greek and Latin versions have the equivalent of Stt7 Mbl and it went forth and returned not, and this is the reading adopted by Ball but the Samaritans have substantially the received text, merely substituting finite verbs for the two infinitives, and the Syriac Version, although it follows the Greek so far as to render the second infinitive, by a finite verb with the negative, has pre;

served the
text.

first

as in the

Hebrew

idiom.

Moreover, as Holzinger

suggests, the following clause seems to forbid any change in the
Ball first rearranges the text present position and inserting it after v. 9; then connects the two by supplying and he -waited seven days One of the reasons given for the at the beginning of the former.
f

So Budde (BU,
v. 7

272)

and others.

by removing

from

its

transposition is, that the whole passage relative to the birds is thus brought into agreement with the Chaldean account. The alleged agreement, however, does not result; for the raven remains the

second of four, whereas, in the Babylonian account it is the last of See Schrader, KB, vi. I, 240 f. Appendix, three, birds released.
;

11.

153

f-

214

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
:

[VIII. 8-11

by two important considerations
place in

(/)

The raven

has no

the narrative, being of a different species proper from the rest of the birds, and having no necessary or (2) This verse gives, as clearly distinguishable function.
v. 7 does not, but naturally would, if it were a part of the original story, the reason why Noah sent forth the

bird, viz.,

to see

if

the water

had subsided.*

These

But omit v. 7, and v. 6 furreasons seem convincing. When the nishes the date for the release of the dove.
episode of the raven, which seems to have been suggested by the Babylonian story, was inserted, a temporal clause might have been added, but, if it had been the one suggested, it would have emphasized rather than relieved the difficulties in the chronology of the story. 9. The result of Noah's first trial was what might have

been expected.
resting
-

The dove
because,

place,

returned, having found no the rain having so recently

ceased, there was water on the face of the whole This statement conflicts with v. 5 (P), as has earth.

been shown, but
10.

it

is

in

harmony with the

rest of the

Yahwistic narrative.

Noah waited f seven days more:

/.

e.,

in

the

original meaning of the words, seven days in addition to the forty that he had already spent in the ark f then he
:

again sent a, possibly the, dove forth from the ark. 11. This time the dove, having found places to alight and rest, did not return until eventide, and then it came bringing a fresh olive leaf, one freshly plucked
* In the Greek Version the clause has been inserted
in v.
7,

but

not omitted, as it should have been, from this one. in v I2 Olshausen and others read f For brPI here and
brij*3
-

Comp.

Ball.

This would be sufficiently clear without the words hence it is possible that they are not original.
;

VIII. n-13]

COMMENTS
mouth.

215

from a

tree, in its

Then Noah, knowing

that

the olive did not grow in high altitudes, concluded that

the water had greatly subsided. 12. After a second interval of seven days he set free It found a third dove, or the same bird a third time.
the earth so nearly dry that
it

could procure food without

him again. difficulty, and it did not return to told what Noah did, when the next The Yahwist 13. dove failed to return as on the other occasions of its release but his account is here interrupted by another bit of chronology from the Priestly narrative, to the effect that it was in the six hundred and first year of the life of Noah,* and, indeed, in the first month and on the first of the month, when the water had dried off the earth, i. e., as must be inferred from v. 14, had disappeared from the surface. Thus, while the Yahwist represents the water that fell during the forty days of the storm as subsiding in fourteen days, the Priestly narrator allows more time for the decrease than for the increase of the deluge ninety of the one hundred and
;

;

sixty-four days being required for its disappearance after the tops of the mountains became visible. Of these

three months the last extract from the Yahwistic nar~

account for fifty-four days. Of the remaining thirty-six the compiler may have given from one to seven to the interval between vv. 7 and 8 the
rative is

made

to

;

greater

number would represent

that after

v.

12.

The

chronological data just given are followed by the sequel to v. 1 2, in which the Yahwist recites that, when Noah

perceived that the dove was not to return, he removed a part of the covering of the ark, perhaps the lid of a

hatchway, and found that the ground was dry. * The phrase of the life of Noah is supplied from vii.
authority of the

n

on the

Greek Version.

216

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
The Yahwist

[VIII. 14

14. apparently intends to represent Noah as making the above discovery very soon after the failure of the dove to return to its cote. The compiler divided

the verse for the purpose of bringing his sources into In this way it is made to appear that, although the dove left the ark not later than the first of
greater harmony.

the

ference from

month, Noah did not act upon the natural inits disappearance until the second month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month, for not until that date, according to the Priestly narrator, was the earth dry. These fifty-six days, more or less, added to the number that had already elapsed, make the duration of the subsidence, in round numbers, two hundred and twenty, instead of fourteen days, and the length of time between the beginning and the end of the deluge about three hundred and seventy, instead of fifty-four days. Now the number three hundred and seventy does not tally with any measure of time known to have been in use among the Hebrews. It is therefore probable that the number one hundred and fifty, in vi. 24 and vii. 3, is a round number, that the months of this author are lunar months, and that the year and ten, or, counting both termini, eleven days, amounts to a solar year of three hundred and sixty-five days.*
first

Compare Dillmann, who holds that the length of the Flood according to the Priestly narrator was originally twice a hundred
and that w. 133 and 14 represent fifty, or three hundred days, a later theory and Holzinger, who, on the other hand, declares vii. 24 and viii. 30, the pass-ages in which the number one hundred

*

and

;

The Babylonians made the fifty occurs, editorial additions. In duration of the Flood much shorter than even the Yahwist.
and
the original of the story the total

been fourteen.
;

number of days seems to have See Schrader, KB, vi. r, 238 ff.; Appendix, 11. 128 ff. com p. Lenormant, BH, 416 f. This statement is based on the supposition that the birds were all set free on the same day
;

VIII. 15-19]

COMMENTS

217

the water had subsided, Noah and his comthemselves in undisputed possession of the found panions God did not, however, permit them to enter upon earth. their inheritance until he had instructed his servant with

When

reference to
(3)

THE FUTURE OF THE SURVIVORS

(viil 15-ix. 17).

Here, too, the narrative is twofold, but the component parts have been so arranged that the casual reader does
not detect their duplicate character. The whole may be divided into three sections, the first of which, from the content of the Yahwistic extract incorporated with it,

may be
(a)

entitled

1 5. It opens with a (viii. 1 5-22). description, in the characteristic style of thePriestly narrator, of the debarkation of the inmates of the ark.

Noa/ts Offering

1

6.

In the

command
;

to

that Noah's wife takes precedence of her sons. also vi. 18 v. 1 8 vii. (7), 13.
:

go forth from the ark notice Comp.

1

7.

that

The number and order of the classes of animals Noah is instructed to bring forth * correspond to
vi.

those of

20.

Comp.

v.

19;

vii.

14, 21 (23).

It is

God's
8.

will

swarm
1

that they shall again, as before the Flood, in the earth.
v.
1

Comp.

6.

19.

The

text

is

doubtful,! but the

meaning

is

clear

:

is the natural interpretation of the language used. Berosus, however, in his version of the story says that there was an interval of some days between the hero's attempts to learn the condition of

such

the earth.

See Cory,

AF,

61.

the Massoretes prefer to the original " a mere reading, Ball characterizes as fancy." Bottcher ( 437, /"), it as a case of dissimilation after ^"IWH. See however, explains
also Ps. v. 9/8.
f The reading adopted is that of the Samaritans, of which the received text appears to be a corruption explicable by supposing

*

The form N!Tn which

218

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRA HAM
left

[VIII. 19-21

viz., that all

command,

the animals preserved, in obedience to God's the ark with Noah. The beasts here in17,

clude domestic animals, just as, in v. See i. 30 vi. 20. include wild beasts.
;

the cattle

20. In the present text w. 15-19 serve as an introduction to an extract (vv. 20-22) from the Yahwistic nar-

by which Noah expressed He had no sooner left the ark than he erected an altar to Yahweh, on which he
rative describing the sacrifice his gratitude for deliverance.

offered the seventh of the animals

(vii.

2)

representing

each of the clean species of cattle and birds in the ark, as burnt offerings, i. e., offerings to be consumed entire,

on the
ings. 21.

altar.

This
iv. 4.

is

the

first

mention of such

offer-

Comp.

The patriarch's prompt and generous recognition of the divine hand in his experience did not remain unrewarded.

Yahweh,

pomorphism that sounds

says the author, using an anthrolike a relic of Babylonian myth-

ology,* but, strange to say, is of frequent occurrence in the Priestly narrative (Lev. i. 9, 13; etc.) f Yahweh smelled the pleasant odor, and, touched by the devotion it symbolized, said to himself, lit. to his heart, I

will not again curse the ground. The curse to which reference is here made is generally identified with the
recent visitation (Dillmann).
But, as has been repeat-

that a copyist by mistake transposed ffiyn ^D anc* and then inserted a bl3 before t&DVli without the article, to
it

make The Greek Version has and all the beasts, and all the cattle, and every bird, and every reptile moving on the earth; the Syriac, and all the beasts, and all the cattle, and all the birds, everything that creepeth on the earth. The latter, without the secintelligible.

ond and, is Ball's reading. * See Schrader, KB, vi. i, 240 f. Appendix, 11. 160 ff. t This fact shows that the expression does not necessarily imply
;

sensuous notions of the Deity.

VIII. 21]

COMMENTS
is

219

edly noticed, the Flood

any lasting

effect

upon the

not represented as producing earth, and therefore could

not properly be called a curse. Add to this, not only that the author of v. 29 connects this passage with iii. 17, but that the phraseology employed is evidently a reminiscence of the latter, and it seems reasonable to conclude that the author here intends to represent Yah-

weh as resolving not again to curse the ground, as he did when 'Adham fell, on men's account, for the purpose of punishing them. The next clause is capable of two
or three interpretations, but it is usually regarded as a reason for the resolution just taken by Yahweh. This view, however, is forbidden by the situation. Mankind

persons,

at this time, according to the author, consisted of eight who had been spared because, while their fel-

lows were utterly
character.

The
was

that the design
family, also,

evil, Noah at least was of the opposite interpretation mentioned would imply of the hearts of the patriarch and his evil from their youth, from the age of

This difficulty is avoided by treating the accountability. clause as explanatory of the preceding phrase, on meris
account, reproducing the reason for the Flood as given in vi. 5. Yahweh- is thus made to say that he will not again punish men as he did 'Adham on account of havor, to put it more idiomatically, though they as become, thoroughly evil as, following the example of 'Adham, they were when the Flood was decreed.* In

ing become,

vi.

5

f.

Yahweh was

so

that he was sorry to have

moved by the wickedness of men made them. Here the specta-

of v. 21

* In the above discussion it is taken for granted that the whole is by one author, a supposition that is favored by the in-

If the curse of the first half of the verse is terpretation proposed. the Flood, according to Holzinger, who adopts this view, the ori-

ginality of

Yahweh's

first

resolution

becomes questionable.

220

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[VIII. 2I-IX. 2

cle of the piety of his servant makes him regret that he has been so severe with them, and, as he recalls, to speak after the manner of the author, the multitude of men and

animals that perished in the Flood, he adds, nor will I again smite everything that liveth, as I have done
;

which, however, does not imply that he will henceforth let sin, no matter how flagrant, go unpunished.*
22.

These

limitations

imposed upon himself by Yah-

weh

are followed by an express guaranty of the stability of nature. While f the earth endureth, lit. all the days and the earth is a favorite Hebrew symbol of the earth,
for stability

and perpetuity

(Ps. civ. 5),

seedtime and

harvest, like cold

summer and
cease.

The

heat, characteristic marks of winter, and day and night shall not Flood, it appears, even according to the

and

Yahwist, was a serious disturbance of the order of nature.

The Priestly narrator now resumes his story with a paragraph detailing the instructions given to Noah on i. The begin(b) The Sacredness of Life (ix. 1-7). ning of the new era in the history of the race is signalby a repetition of the blessing bestowed upon the man and woman. The first part, Increase and multiply, that ye may fill the earth, is reproduced verbatim.^ See i. 28. 2. The rest of it is slightly modified. In i. 28 man is
ized
first

encouraged to assert his lordship over the animals, as if they would instinctively recognize in him a superior being and peaceably submit to be controlled. The general
* In the Babylonian account this point receives attention. See Schrader, KB, 242 f. ; Appendix, 11. 182 ft. t For the 137, still, of the received text read, with the Samaritans,

TO, until.
it.

%

The Greek Version adds and have mastery over

IX. 2-4]

COMMENTS

221

corruption has made the fulfilment of this ideal impossible. Still, the brute must be held in subjection to humanity. God promises that he will inspire with fear

and dread of mankind the beasts of the earth and the birds of heaven, and thus give them, as well as the smaller animals, with which the ground teemeth, and tne fish of the sea, into man's hand. Moreover, he decrees that every moving thing 3. that liveth shall be man's to eat. Like the green The last clause is herb, he says, I give you them all a reference to i. 29. It calls attention to the fact that, according to the Priestly narrative, man had not hitherto
eaten flesh of any sort. Comp. Delitzsch. Now, however, he is given permission to slay and eat, not only the cattle, but animals of every species without exception. In other words, the author here expressly teaches that, in Noah's

between clean and unclean, recognized by the Yahwist in vii. 2 and viii. 20, did not exist. His idea, as appears later in his work, was that this distinction, with the observance of it, was introduced by
time, the distinction

Moses.
4.
/.

See Lev. xi. i ff. There is but one restriction
is

:

Flesh with

its life,

e. t

as

at once^ explained, its

blood,* ye shall not

eat.

No

instructions are given with reference to the

The author cannot have thought disposal of the blood. of it as sacrificed, for sacrifices of all kinds, according to
his theory, began with Moses. See Lev. xvii. i ff. He would doubtless have said it was poured upon the ground and covered with dust, as the law he attributes to Moses See requires in the case of animals slain in hunting.

*
in v.

Ball treats
5,

as a gloss ; but the use of WCft,your blood, especially in view of its emphatic position, seems to favor

tm

the present reading.

222

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
xvii.

[IX. 4-7
life,

Lev.

13.*

On

the relation of the blood to
ff.

see

further Lev.

prohibition includes not only flesh from living animals, but that of those not properly bled ; e. g., one that has died of disease or been
xvii.

10

The

killed

by another.

See Lev.

xvii. 15.

Compare the

cruel

or disgusting practices of various other ancient peoples. The blood of beasts may be shed, when their flesh 5.
is

required by
is

men
is
;

for food

;

blood
crime.

strictly prohibited, If
it
it

shed,

God

but the shedding of men's except in punishment for will make demand of the

it be any beast that has slain a man, or any one's brother. 6. The penalty is one. He, whether beast or man, that sheddeth men's blood, by men shall his blood

shedder for

whether

be shed.

This law gives any member of the community to which the victim belonged, although the next of kin would be the natural avenger, the right to take the life
of the homicide,

and that without inquiring under what

circumstances the deed to be avenged was committed. It is intended to mirror the supposed practice of the
early Hebrews.

For the modifications

of the law

which

the author attributes to Moses, see Num. xxxv. 9 ff.f The reason given for the peculiar sacredness of men's

they were made in the image of God. not to kill and destroy one another, but 7. to multiply, nay, swarm, in the earth and exercise
lives is that
It is theirs,

lordship J over
*

it.

Among

was a

sacrificial act,

the Arabs the pouring of the blood upon the ground and so, in all probability, although the Priestly
it

W.

author thought otherwise, R. Smith, RS, 216 f.

was among the ancient Hebrews.

See
the

t On the history and significance of the lex talionis early Semites, see W. R. Smith, RS> 33 f., 72, 254, 399.

among

\ So Ball, following Nestle, in text repeats 13"), multiply.

harmony with

i.

28.

The

received

IX. 8-12]

COMMENTS
last
ff.),

223

paragraph from the Yahwistic narrative although Yahweh is represented as taking a resolution with reference to his future treatment of mankind, there is no mention of a formal covenant, or even of the communication of the divine purpose to the patriIn the
(viii.

20

arch.

made and
(c)

According to the Priestly narrator a covenant was proclaimed, the sign of which was
(vv. 8-17).
8.

God's bow
alone.

Hitherto

God has spoken

to

Noah

He now

reveals his gracious purpose to

the patriarch and his sons with him. 9. The reason for so doing is that they are to be Comp. vi. 18. Their offparties to the new covenant.
spring, the
benefits.
10. Finally, all the living creatures according to their classes, having shared with Noah and his family the

new race

to spring

from them,

will inherit its

perils of the
ator,

Flood and the preserving care of their Cre-

are

promise.

made partakers with mankind of the divine The last clause is difficult, but the most nat-

ural interpretation is that it was meant to emphasize the inclusiveness of the covenant, the extremes being the human survivors that go forth from the ark (v. 9) and the beasts of the earth * just mentioned. 11. The content of the covenant is, that all flesh

shall not again
that, indeed,

be cut off by the water of a flood there shall not again be a flood to ravage f the earth. See viii. 21. 1 2. The establishment of this covenant is the free act
:

*

The

last

phrase

is

wanting

in the

Greek Version.
it

Holzinger,
in

therefore,

who

insists

upon interpreting

as

meaning beasts

He is then obliged to exgeneral, pronounces it an interpolation. plain the ft of bDft,/>w all, as a case of dittography. See vi. 17. f For nnttfb the Samaritans read nTllPnb.

224

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[IX. 12-14

of the Almighty.
like the covenant,
is

The sign of the covenant, too, which, must endure to endless generations,
calls

of his
1 3.

own choosing.* The sign chosen he

my bow.
in

sion reminds one of the

Hindoo myth

This expreswhich the bow

used by Indra, in shooting bolts of lightning at his enemies, when the storm is over becomes the rainbow, a See Dillmann. This bow sign of peace to mankind, f God promises to place, not once for all, but, as the next
verse explains, at indefinite intervals, in the clouds, to serve as a reminder of the covenant now established.

The author apparently thought that hitherto there had been no such thing as a rainbow. There are those who undertake to defend this opinion (Keil). Few modern readers, however, will believe that the laws of light and the properties of the atmosphere were so different before the Flood from what they have been since, that in that Those, early period a rainbow never followed a shower. therefore, who are concerned to maintain the infallibility
he
of the author generally adopt the less probable view, that is here explaining the origin, not of the rainbow, but

of its adoption as a sign (Murphy).
14.

The

reader cannot but be struck with the fitness

of the rainbow, appearing as it does after a storm, to strengthen the faith of the patriarch in God's promise

not again to destroy mankind or ravage the earth by a The author himself must have perceived its deluge.
* It seems clear that the relative clause was intended to describe
the covenant
;

yet,

owing doubtless

to a confusion of the

two

ideas,

the verb

not the one (Dip III., establish) elsewhere found in such a connection, but the one ("jro, give) used of the promised
is

sign.

f

See v. 13; comp. v. 19. For a reference to the bow of Anu, the Babylonian god of

heaven, see Schrader,

KB,

vi. i,

32

f.

IX. 14-17]

COMMENTS
significance, but this
It

225

manward
to

impressed him.

is not the side that most was the Godward side that seemed him most important. This must be borne in mind in

the interpretation of the description of the conditions, when I overspread the earth with a cloud, under which the sign will become operative. The cloud is
here, not a possible object of fear to mankind, but a con-

venient screen on which the
15.

bow shall
now

appear.
stated: that
I,

The purpose

of the sign is

not mankind, may remember the covenant, and that, as a result, the water may not continue to fall so long as to become a flood destroying all flesh.
1 6. This verse repeats the thought of the last two, emphasizing the anthropomorphic features of the repre-

sentation.
17.

Comp.

v. 12.

Flood is composite, and (2) that the two accounts interwoven to produce it present important variations. Incidentally it has been shown, also, (j) that the Babylonian story is a third account of the same event, differing in some respects from both, but most from the later, of the others.* This last, being the oldest of the three, f and therefore nearest to the event which they all describe, must be taken into account in
of the
.

The above Hebrew story

discussion has

made

clear,

(/)

that the

* For a comparative View of the three, see Schrader, COT, i. ff Boscawen, BM, 1 14 ff. t The tablets from which the modern world in 1872 derived its first knowledge of this story were written in the reign of Asshurbanipal (668-626 B. c.) but they were copies of others of much earlier origin. One recently found, which contains a fragment of
58
.

;

;

the story, is dated in the reign of Ammi-saduga, who, according to the best authorities, flourished before 2000 B. c. See Enc. Bib.
art.

Deluge, 6

;

Jastrow,

RBA,

507.

226

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
Now

[VI. 9-IX. 17

any attempt to determine the real nature of that event and the date of its occurrence. although this story, its the Flood as having in form, also, represents present
destroyed
all mankind except the occupants of Utnapishtim's vessel, there are indications that the original catastrophe was the destruction of a city called Shurippak

on the lower Euphrates. It is therefore probable that a local inundation was the common foundation of the
It must have occurred long before 2348 the date of the Flood according to the Priestly narrator, as appears from the fact that the hero of the

three accounts.
B. c.,

event

is

period.*

one, the last, of the ten kings of the prehistoric This means that neither of the three accounts
strictly historical.
It

can be regarded as

does not, how-

that they are all alike valueless. When they ever, are compared as vehicles of moral and religious instruc-

mean

tion,

the superiority of the

Hebrew accounts

is

at

once

The Babylonian story is polytheistic, and its apparent. gods are as capricious, jealous, and quarrelsome as those
of the other ancient pantheons. of one of these divinities.
Its

hero

is

the favorite

The Hebrew tradition, on the other hand, even in its oldest known form, is thoroughly monotheistic, and its God is a being whose character commands instant and unmixed reverence. Its hero is the man who alone won the favor of his God by his The latter story would naturally have an righteousness. effect upon those among whom it circulated as salutary
as that of the other

must have been unwholesome, and
its

there can be no doubt that, in spite of
*

unhistorical

According to Jastrow (RBA, 501 f., 506) the Babylonian story combines with the tradition of the destruction of Shurippak reminiscences of the destructive rains that flooded Babylonia annually before the completion of the system of canals for which the country

was famous.

Comp. Enc.

Bib., art. Deluge, 22.

IX.- 1 8, 19]
features,

COMMENTS

227

it has been the means, under God, of deterring from sin and confirming them in reverence for, many and obedience to, their Maker.

The
titled

history of the patriarch closes with a

passage,

mostly from the Yahwistic narrative, which may be enb.
1 8.

Noah's Prophecy

(ix.

18-29).

Thus far the Yah wist has given no hint of the number of persons in Noah's family. See vii. i, 23. He now mentions three sons, giving them the same names as the Priestly narrator in v. 32, vi. 10, and vii. 13.

was
tion

In the present text there follows an explanation, the father of Kena'an. The reason for its inseris

Ham

evident.

It

was intended

to prepare the reader

for the story from another source, beginning with v. 20, in which Kena'an is the prominent figure. That story, in v. 22, contains another reference to the relation be-

tween Ham and Kena'an even more noticeable than the one found here. The gratuitousness of the latter arouses
the suspicion that neither of them is original, that they were both inserted by a compiler for the purpose of harmonizing vv. 20 ff. with their present context a sus;

picion strengthened by the fact that even now the harmony is not complete, since, while in this verse, as in the
vi. 10; vii. 13 x. 6 ff.), Ham (v. 32 the second, in v. 24, if he is the offender, he is exThe difficulty pressly called the youngest son of Noah. is explained, and with it the interpolations in question, by

Priestly narrative

;

;

is

vv. 25

ff.,

whence

it

of the story, the patriarch's three sons

appears that, according to the author were not Shem,

Ham, and Yepheth, but Shem, Yepheth, and Kena'an.*
19.

From

* Ort the bearing of

these as progenitors, all the rest of manx. 21, see the comment on that passage.

228

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
or,

[IX. 19-22

kind having been destroyed by the Flood, the whole

more exactly, the new population of the themselves abroad. * spread 20. The last two verses seem to have been the
earth,

globe,
intro-

duction to the Yahwistic

2

(J

)

table of the nations, frag-

which are preserved in chapter x. There now follows them an extract from the same source (J 1 ) as iv. It recounts the experience of Noah the hus17 ff. bandman as the planter of the first vineyard, f 21. In due time he gathered his grapes and made them into wine. Of this he drank, not knowing what would be the effect whereupon he became drunk and, while in this condition, exposed himself where he lay within
of
;

ments

his tent.

found Here, according to the received text, Originally however, as has been shown, it must have been Kena'an who saw the nakedness of his father and, instead of making haste to hide the patriarch's shame, as he should have done, told his brethren, Shem and Yepheth, apparently with indecent mirth or malice,
22.

Ham

him.

what he had witnessed.^
*

Comp. Holzinger.

All this
art.

On

71203, see Ges.

67,

R

1 1

;

comp. Siegfried-Stade,

f The text, literally rendered, reads, Noah the husbandman began N and planted a vineyard. Ball inserts nb to be, after J~!3 in

m

imitation of x. 8.
20, that

But
the

this

Noah was

first

makes the author say, contrary to iii. husbandman, instead of what the con-

text requires, that he was the first vintner. happier suggestion is that of Budde (BU, 312), that the original reading was H3 VP1
; ) n?3"TW tt^S> and Noah became a husbandman, and began, etc., and that the text was changed to suit the new context, when the story was given its present place after that of the Flood. On the construction, see Ges. 120, 2, a.

A

!H PT3

bn

N<

Noah

J

The Greek Version has he went forth and told, and

Ball adopts

this reading; but his claim that

^in2

without, implies a preced-

ing

S^l

is

not supported by usage, the example he cites (xxxix. 12)

IX. 22-25]

COMMENTS

229

Noah were all young; which they cannot have been according to the author of This difficulty either of the accounts of the Flood.
implies that the three sons of

could be avoided by inserting the incident here narrated before the Flood but then it would be impossible to ex;

the preservation of such a person as Kena'an. These considerations make it necessary to conclude that the work to which this story belonged did not contain
plain

an account of the Flood.
23.

The two

older brothers, with

a

filial

reverence

ample worthy outer garments often used by orientals as a covering at night (Ex. xxii. 25/26 f.), and covered their father, their faces meanwhile being modestly turned back-

of all praise,

took a cloak, one

of the

ward.
24.

The close

connection between this and the follow-

ing verses requires that his youngest son should be Comp. Dillmann. interpreted as referring to Kena'an.
25. This being admitted, there is not the least difficulty in understanding the otherwise unjustifiable malediction, Cursed be Kena'an, which Noah uttered when

he learned what had happened. He cursed Kena'an, not because Kena'an was the youngest, and therefore presumably the dearest, son of Ham (Delitzsch), but because Kena'an himself was the offender. His fate is to be the lowest of servants, lit. the servant of servants* to his
~

viz. as the following verses show, the other sons of Noah, Shem and Yepheth. The reference to the subjugation of the Promised Land is unmistakable.

brethren

;

t

Kena'an must, therefore, be interpreted, not in the broader sense of x. 1 5 ff ., but like Kena'anite in xxiv. 3,
not presenting a parallel case.
viii. i.

On
;

the other hand, see Cant,
133, 3,

*

On

this idiom, see Cant.

i.

i

Ges.

R

2.

230
etc.,

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[IX. 26, 27

as including merely the primitive inhabitants of

Palestine.*
26. Having cursed Kena'an, the patriarch takes occasion to pronounce a corresponding blessing upon each of his other sons, beginning with the elder. Blessed of

The use of the divine says, be Shem.f name dearest to the Hebrews in this connection indicates that Shem is here only another name for Israel, and this idea is confirmed when one considers the relation that he

Yahweh, he

is

henceforth to sustain to Kena'an.

He

is

to be a mas-

a servant to him.f This was the precise relation between the Hebrews and the original occupants of the most of Palestine after the Conquest. See Jos. xvii. 13 Jud. etc. 28, 30, 33
ter

and Kena'an

is

to be

;

i.

;

The second son receives the benediction, May God, not Yahweh the Holy one of Israel, enlarge The significance of these words is disputed. Yepheth.
27.
It

has usually been taken for granted that the Yepheth

* The etymology of the name \2^i K'na'an, is doubtful. See Enc. Bib., art. Canaan. Whatever its derivation, the author of this story doubtless connected it with Vtt be humble, and saw in it, as in C27 Shem (Renown), a presage of the destiny of the people

who
f

bore

it.

The

received text has Blessed be

Yahweh

the

God of Shem;

but this leaves

Shem

without a blessing and makes Kena'an the

servant of Yahweh.

These

difficulties
ff.),

are removed by adopting

Budde's suggestion (BU, 294

that

*nbN God

of,

be omitted
after

and Yahweh made the genitive, instead of the predicate, blessed. See xxvi. 29.
\

see Isa. xliv. 15 ; Ges. 103, 2, n. furnishes an excellent example of paronomasia, which, however, cannot be rendered into English without taking undue liberty with the thought of the author. It is gener-

On 1Eb

The verb nSN yapht,

ally regarded as at the same time an etymology of Yepheth. Budde (BU, 358 ff.), however, derives the name from nDN be beautiful, citing nb"T etc., as similar formations.

IX. 27]

COMMENTS
is

^y
and, on the basis of

here meant

the Yepheth of

x. 2,

this assumption, believed that the prayer of the patriarch was answered in the participation of some of the peoples

which, according to

x.

2

ff.,

sprang from Yepheth,

in

the

power and glory
mann), Gospel to the
(Delitzsch).

of the ancient Shemitic empires (Dillor the admission of the entire family through the
spiritual benefits of the

Kingdom

of

God

however, as has been shown, there is no connection between this passage and either source of
If,

chapter x., and the names Shem and Kena'an must both be interpreted in a narrower sense here than there, it is
fair to

conclude that the Yepheth

who

is

to

dwell in the

tents of Shem,* while Kena'an is to be a servant to him also, represents a people in or near Palestine. Well-

hausen (CH, 14
but, as

f.)

thinks

it

Budde (BU, 331

can only be the Philistines ; has shown, the Hebrews ff.)

always regarded the Philistines as aliens, and the relations between the two peoples were from the first almost
I Sam. ix. See Jud. xiv. 3 f continuously unfriendly. Thus 2 Sam. v. 17 ff. Isa. ix. 12; etc. 16; xviii. 25 there was never a time when the expansion of Philistia
.

;

;

;

a loyal
cians.

could have been regarded as a thing to be desired by Hebrew/ Compare the case of the Phoeni-

They, like the Hebrews, spoke the language of Kena'an." The two peoples, although in some places they overlapped (Jud. 131 f.), seem never to have had any serious misunderstanding. When the monarchy was established, the relations between them became of the most cordial and profitable character (2 Sam. v. 1 1 I Kgs. v. i and the friendship continued for cenff.)
;

"

;

turies,

being sealed by royal intermarriages

(i

Kgs.

xi.

i

;

* The view, dictated by Jewish prejudice, that the subject of N See, however, Briggs, }2tZ? is God, is now generally abandoned.

MP,

82

f.

232
xvi.

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[IX. 27

Meanwhile the Phoenicians, 31 ; 2 Kgs. viii. 18). having, like the Hebrews, conquered from earlier possessors the .territory that they occupied, must have held
the native population in a more or less humiliating bondIn i Kgs. ix. n, Solomon is said to have transage.
ferred twenty cities of Galilee to the king of Tyre.

Add

to these considerations that the Phoenicians were the

only neighbors whose expansion would not injure the Hebrews, and the conclusion seems irresistible, that they

were the people for whom the blessing here recorded was intended.* The teaching of this story, therefore, from the genealogical standpoint, is that Noah was the
father, not of the

new race that peopled the earth after the Flood, but of the three related peoples whose history is the history of Palestine.! The deeper lessons are that like produces like in the moral as in the physical
* Budde (BUj 361 ff.) draws a further argument for the above view from the fatness of Yepheth, in the sense he gives to it, to represent the country and people whose capital was Tyre, a city famed for its beauty. See Eze. xxvii. 3 f. etc. He also (343 ff.) answers objections, the chief of which is based on the apparent use of the term Kena'anite as a distinctive designation of the Phoeni;

cians, especially in Num. xiii. 29; xiv. 25; Jos. v. I iii. 3 ; 2 Sam. xxiv. 7 ; Isa. xxiii. 1 1 Oba. 20. In ;

;

xiii.

4; Jud.

none of these

passages is Kena'an or Kena'anite the proper and peculiar name of Phoenicia or the Phoenicians, but of the country sometimes, it is true, inclusive of Phoenicia west of the Jordan or its inhabiWhen the Phoenicians are to be distinguished from the tants.
rest,

they are called Sidonians.
f.
;

See Deu.
v.

iii.

9; Jos.

Jud. iii. 3; x. II 2 Kgs. xxiii. 13.
t In v. 28
ff.

xviii. 7;

I

Kgs.

20/6;

xi. I, 5,

xiii. 4, 6; 33; xvi. 31 ;

Noah

See further McCurdy, HPM, i. 159 f. is made the son of Lemekh but
;

this

can

hardly have been the idea of the original Yahwist. Perhaps, as Budde (Bf/j 405 ff.) suggests, in parts of his work omitted by the compiler he may have connected the patriarch with the Lemekh of iv. 1 8 ff. through Yabhal the first shepherd.

IX. 28, 29]

COMMENTS

233

realm, and that God rewards the good and punishes the
evil for their doings.

28. The paragraph in its present form closes with a statement concerning the length of the life of the hero of the Flood from the Priestly narrative. He lived after

the Flood, which began in his six hundredth year (vii. ii) and lasted nearly two months beyond the end of it (viii. 13), three hundred and fifty years. 29. Thus the patriarch attained the enormous age of nine hundred and fifty years, an age, according to the received text, exceeded only by Yeredh (962) and Methushelah (969) but, according to the more reliable reading of the Samaritans, equaled by none of his predeces;

sors.*

incident just discussed serves a twofold purpose, furnishing an impressive conclusion to the history of

The

Noah and

arousing an interest in that of his sons.

The

narrative next gives an account of the distribution of their descendants, in other words of
4.

THE ORIGIN OF THE PEOPLES
two chapters
Divisions

(x.-xi.).

larger part of these general survey of
a.

The

is

devoted to a

The Race and

its

(x. 1-xi. 9).

On
its

views.

seem to have been two different was that the various peoples, each with peculiar features, language, customs, etc., had their
this subject there

The

first

origin in

GRADUAL DISPERSION (x.) along genealogical This view was shared by the Priestly narrator with the second Yahwist, both of whom prepared tables show(i)

A

lines.

* For

TP1

(sing.) read,

with the Samaritans,

Vjn (plur.).

234

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[X.

i,

2

one another.
this chapter
i.

ing the relation of the peoples within their horizon to From these tables the one preserved in

was compiled.

tions,

these are the generabegins with a title, from the Priestly narrative. The beginning of the Yahwistic table, as has already been explained, is
It
etc.,

Now

found in ix. i8f., where it serves as an introduction to Noah's prophecy. Perhaps the last half of this verse, and there were born to them sons after the Flood, is from the same source. The Priestly narrator does not elsewhere attach statements of the sort here found to his titles. See v. i vi. 9 etc. comp. Dillmann. The sons of Noah are taken in the reverse order, and the peoples that sprang from each of them enumerated.
;

;

:

First, therefore,
(a)

come

The Families of Yepheth (vv. 2-5). 2. His firstborn was Gomer, who represents the Kimmerians (Ass. Gimirri), an Aryan tribe who once had their home in
southern Russia, giving name, as is supposed (Meyer), GA, i. 452), to the Crimea. They first appeared in Asia

by way

early in the seventh century B. c., but whether they came of Thrace across the Bosphorus (Meyer), or

through the mountains east of the Black Sea (Sayce), is The fact that they came into contact with the disputed.
Assyrians some years before their attack upon the kingof Lydia seems to favor the latter opinion.* They were finally driven back eastward where they lost them-

dom

;

Aryan hordes by whom the Assyrian empire was overthrown but not until they had become so
selves

among

the

;

* Esarhaddon (Schrader,

KB,

ii.

128

f.)

claims to have defeated

them, apparently in the region of Cilicia. When they assailed Lydia, he had been succeeded by Asshurbanipal (Schrader, KB, ii.
172
ff.).

See Meyer,

GA,

i.

453
f.

ff.

:

Rogers,

HBA,

ii.

239

f.,

256

f.;

Ragozin, Assyria, 337, 378

X. 2]

COMMENTS

235

that the ancient closely associated with Cappadocia See it Gamir. at called least, nians, Meyer, GA, i. Die. Bib. art. Corner.

Arme486
;

In Eze. xxxviil Corner furnishes a
But, since
is

contingent for the final invasion of Palestine. Gogh, the leader in this disastrous expedition,

evidently a reminiscence of the Scythian invasion (Meyer, GA, i. 463 f. Ragozin, Assyria, 423 ff.), it is probable that Maghogh, the second son of Yepheth, represents the the Saka, Scythians, or, as the Persians called them, who left their name in a region at the foot of the CauThe casus, the Sacasene of the ancient geographers.*
;

Assyrians and Babylonians seem to have included them with the Kimmerians under the general term Manda, nomads. See Schrader, KB, ii. 128 f. iii. 2, 98 f. The
;

same term sometimes included the Medes, who were
properly called Mada, the equivalent of the name here given to the third son of Yepheth, Madhay. The Assyrians
first

came

into contact with
c.,

end

of the ninth century B.

them toward the when they occupied the
;

See region about the southern end of the Caspian Sea. Schrader, KB, i. 142 f., 190 f. Rogers, HBA, ii. 87. They were then without a general government. In
process of time they became a united nation, powerful

The name Gogh is by some (Meyer) identified with that of the Lydian king Gyges (Ass. Gugu\ but, in view of the facts in the case, there is more reason for supposing it the equivalent of Gagu, which occurs in an inscription of Asshurbanipal as the name of the king of Sahi, a country to the north of Assyria. See Frd. De-

*

WLP, 246 f. Ragozin, Assyria, 422. The name Maghogh occurs also Eze. xxxviii. 2 and xxxix. 6; but in the latter passage, as appears from the Greek Version (B), it is a mistake for Gogh,
litzsch,
;

in the former, according to Meyer (GA, i. 464, n.), an interpoHolzinger suggests that here, also, the original reading may have been Gogh, and that the error was occasioned by the proxim-

and

lation.

ity of

Madhay.

236

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[X. 2

enough, first to throw off the Assyrian yoke, and then, with the aid of the Babylonians, to overthrow the empire.

See Meyer, GA, 481 f Ragozin, Assyria, 419 comp. Rogers, HBA, ii. 287 ff. It should also be
i.
.

;

ff.

;

re-

membered

Media by Cyrus, the Hebrews,
xiii.

in this connection, that, after the conquest of like the Greeks, often

called all the subjects of the empire Medes.

See

etc. Yawan (Ass. Yamanu}, prop17; Jer. li. erly the lonians of the southwestern coast of Asia Minor and the islands adjacent, is here, as elsewhere in the
;

n

I^a.

Old Testament (Zch. ix. 13; Dan. viii. 21; etc.), the Greeks in general. As in Eze. xxvii. 13, where they
receive earliest mention, so here, they are associated

Tubhal*and Moshekh.f Tubhal (Ass. Tabalu) supposed to denote the Tibarenians, a people who, when they first appear in history (c. 850 B. c.), occupy the country adjoining Cilicia on the north (Schrader, KB, L 142 f., ii. 56 f.) and Moshekh (Ass. Muskku), the Moschians, whose territory adjoined that of the TibaSee Meyer, GA, i. renians on the northeast. 245 ; ii. 22 f. HBA, They generally appear together, Rogers,
with
is
.

;

not only in the Old Testament, but in the Assyrian inIn Eze. xxxviii. i ff. they, like Gomer, are scriptions.

arrayed under the leadership of Gogh which is only another way of saying what is here taught, that all these In peoples were in some way related to one another.
;

the Persian period the Moschians and the Tibarenians occupied parts of the mountainous region along the southeastern shore of the Black Sea.

See Frd. Delitzsch,

* The received text has b^n> without 1> but many manuscripts full form, b^H> as do the Samaritans. t The text has -pZ7E Meshekh, but the Samaritan reading is -JQ?1ft and this is supported by the M^ro*, Mosoch, of the Greek
have the
Version.

X.

2,

3]

COMMENTS
250 f.

237

that deserves mention

only theory with reference to Tiras is the one according to which it means the Tyrsenians, a primitive seafaring people, probably the Turushu of the Egyptian monuments (Meyer,

WLP,

The

GA,
;

i.

260, 263

;

Rawlinson,

AE,

258, 275

ff.),

who

had their home on the shores and islands of the ^gean Sea and this can hardly be regarded as satisfactory.*
3.

The

author follows the process of dispersion

still

Gomer is represented as farther, but only in two lines. the father of three tribes or peoples. Their identity is more or less uncertain. Jer. 11 27, however, seems to
furnish a clue to that of the
in this passage, 'Ararat is
first, 'Ashkenaz. Since, Armenia and Minni the coun-

try of the Mannai of the Assyrian inscriptions to the southeast of it (Die. Bib., art. Minni), it is safe to seek

'Ashkenaz in the same region. The conditions seem to be met by Ashguza, whose king supported the Mannaeans in a revolt against Esarhaddon. See Schrader,

KAT,

610;

KB,

ii.

128

f.,

146!

;

comp. Dillmann.

If,

however, 'Ashkenaz was northeast of Assyria, it is not probable that Riphath f was either in eastern (Josephus) or western (Bochart) Bithynia. The safer supposition is,
that
it

was

in the

Ezekiel

(xxxviii. 6) locates in

dition identifies

neighborhood of Togharmah, which the remote north and trawith Armenia.}

" * According to Jub. ix. 1 1 the portion of Tiras was four great islands in the midst of the sea, which approach the portion of

Ham."
f
ist,

For Riphath, has Diphath.

I

Chr.

i.

6,

evidently through an error of a copycall their

\ The name by which the Armenians Thorgom, the Thergama, or Thorgama,

progenitor

is

of the

Greek Version.

The latter is generally accounted an error of the translators, but an examination of the proper names of the region to which the people in question is supposed to have belonged will show that

238

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
The

[X. 4

4. only other branch of the stock of Yepheth His that receives further attention is that of Yawan. The older authorities are divided firstborn is 'Elishah.*

some making it the equivaand others of Hellas (Targum), while still others interpreted it as representing the Greeks of Sicily and Lower Italy (Targ. to Ezekiel). It has also been identified with Elis (Bochart), Carthage, the foundation of Elissa (Movers), and finally with Alashia (Conder), one of whose kings wrote several of the Tell el-Amarna The letters (Schrader, KB, v. I, 80 ff.; Ball, LE, 87 f.).
with reference to this
;

name

lent of ^Eolia (Josephus)

likeness in the last case

is

strikingly close, but this theory,

whether Alashia be located

in northern Syria (Maspero) or Cyprus (Winckler)f requires a reexamination of the prevalent opinion respecting one of the next two sons of
If it was in Syria, there is still something to be said for the idea (Josephus) that Tarshish here means Tarsus or Cilicia while, if it was Cyprus, a new location must be found for the Kittites. The former of these

Yawan.

;

suppositions

is

rendered improbable by the apparent

fa-

miliarity of the Hebrews of the sixth century B. c. with the real location of Tarshish. See Jer. x. 9 ; Eze. xxvii.
12.

The
if

latter
it

Kittites,
there

seems to be forbidden by evidence that was sometimes used in a larger sense than

is something to be said for a contrary opinion. See Tarhuna and Tarhanabi, names of mountains near Lake Van (Schrader, KB, i. 30 f.) Tarzanabi (KB, i. 142 f.) and Bit-taranza(A"/?, ii. 6 f.), places in or near Media; and Tarsihu (KB, i. 182 f.), Tarhular KB, ii. i8f.), and Tarhunazi (KB, ii. 62 f.), kings of Nairi, Gamgum, and Miliddu; etc. * The Samaritan reading is ltf>bs 'EKsh. t Maspero's view is favored by the jealousy of the Hittites dis;

played by a king of Alashia in a letter to Amen-hotep III. (Schrader, KB, v. i. 82 f) Winckler's by the fact that the presents sent by the
;

former to the

latter consisted largely of

copper (KB,

v.

i.

So

ff.).

X.

4,

5]

COMMENTS
xxiv. 24.

239
;

Cyprus, always included that island.
also

Num.

See Isa. xxiii. I, 12 These objections to the identifica-

tion of 'Elishah with Alashia permit a return to one of The only hint of the identity of the the older theories.

country or people in question, outside its name, is found " " where the "isles or "coasts of 'Elishah are the source of the purple stuff from which the Tyrians
in Eze. xxvii. 7,

made awnings

for their ships.

This has been supposed

to point to Greece, or some part of it; but, since Tarentum was as famous in its time for the production of the purple dye from the murex brandaris as Laconia, it
is

colonies of Italy

as safe to say that the prophet had in mind the Greek and Sicily as that he was thinking of the

mother country. In explanation of the appearance of Tarshish and Cyprus as sons of Yawan it should be added that, although both were originally occupied by the Phoenicians (Meyer, GA, i. 191), in the sixth century B. c.
the Greeks had a flourishing settlement at Tartessos 429), and long before that they had (Meyer, GA, ii. almost complete possession of the island of Cygained
prus (Meyer,

Rhodes had a similar hisGA, 277). * the Rodhanites Hence also are numbered tory. among the sons of Yawan. The plural form of the last two names indicates in what sense the term sons is to be
i.

understood in this
5.

table, f
is

The

line of
;

Yawan

not followed beyond the

first

generation but the author adds the general statement, that from these already named the coasts of the nations, the southern coast of
* This

Europe and the

islands of

is the reading in i Chr. i. 7 as well as the Greek and Samaritan codices. The Massoretic text has D^STT, Dodhanites,

by a

copyist's error.
it

t It is possible, also, that

should be interpreted as indicating
v. 13.

difference of authorship.

See

240

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[X.

5,

6

the Mediterranean, or the peoples occupying them, dispersed themselves as branches. This is undoubtedly

the original meaning of the words, but, in the present text, by the omission of a clause corresponding to that

by which the conclusion of a paragraph is introduced in vv. 20 and 31, they are made to refer to the whole family of Yepheth. The words to be supplied in this connection are These were the sons of Yepheth.* Therefour follow the technical in which upon phrases naturally the author presents the thought of separation from as

many different points of view. Thus the peoples are reEach presented as segregated in space in their lands.
also

had

its distinctive

tongue.

The

implication

is

that

the various languages spoken by the branches of the There cerfamily were the result of their separation.
tainly is no indication that the author thought the opposite to have been the case. Comp. xi. i ff. After their

families suggests the intimate relation
viduals of which each family was
division of
(b)

among the
(viii.

indi-

composed

19),

and

in their nations the solidarity of their interests as a

mankind.f

The Families of Ham (yv. 6-20). 6. Ham's firstborn was Kush. This name doubtless has more than one meaning, even in the present chapter. See v. 8. In most cases, however, in which it occurs in the Old Testament it plainly refers to the region, east of the Nile above the first cataract, called by the Greek geographers
* This seems a better explanation than that of Holzinger, who thinks that 13tt?bb E^S betrays the hand of a reviser, and suggests that the one who substituted this expression for DH3lZ?bb also substituted the clause with which the verse now begins for the one that
is

needed to give the remaining words their proper significance. On the form and order of these expressions, compare w. 20 and 31.
t

X. 6]

COMMENTS
;

241

See 2 Kgs. xix. 9 Eze. xxix. 10 ; etc. It is Ethiopia. a therefore priori probable that the same name has the same sense in this connection a supposition that is con;

firmed by the following considerations (/) That since the evident object of the author is to account for the origin of the peoples within his horizon, and the Ethiopi:

ans must have been one of them, he could hardly have omitted them and (2) that the name is here immediately followed by Misrayim, which always elsewhere means
;

and occurs in this sense scores from the work (P) to which the passage in hand belonged.* The third branch of the Hamites is called Put. This name generally (four times out of five) appears elsewhere in the Old Testament in The Greek and Latin versions connection with Kush. render it Libya or Libyans, \ and this is the interpretation given to it by the other ancient, and many modern authorities, in spite of the fact that, in Nah. iii. 9,J the Libyans are a distinct people. If, as Ebers (ABM, 63 ff.) and others contend, Put is the Punt of the Egyptian monuments, which in one instance is located east of Egypt (ABM, 65, n. I, 107), it was probably in Arabia. See Ebers, ABM^'ji Meyer, GA, i. Glaser 178, n. ii. he the (SGA, 333 ff.), although rejects theory that Put and Punt are the same, agrees with Meyer in locating the former, with Pliny's Foda and the modern el-

Egypt

or the Egyptians,

of times in other extracts

;

* This statement of reasons is rendered necessary by the discovery of both a Kush and a Musr in northern Arabia, and an attempt by Cheyne and others to identify them with the Kush

and Misrayim of
Bib., art. Cush.

this passage.

See Wincklcr,

MVG,

1898; Enc.

fin Isa. Ixvi. 19, where the original should doubtless have tolQ instead of bl2, Put, the Greek Version has Phoud and the Latin
Africa. \ In this instance Put
is

wanting in the Greek Version.

242

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[X.

6,

7

Faidh, on the west coast of Arabia. This is the direction in which one would naturally look for it, since the next

name

is

Kena'an,

here, as in

ix.

25, Palestine

and

its

Observe, however, that in this table original population. the Kena'anites are not represented as the brethren of the Hebrews.
7.

Kush had
is
:

five sons.

The

first

of these

is

This name

found only three times elsewhere

in the

Sebha. Old

Testament in Isa. xliii. 3 associated with those of Kush and Misrayim, and in Ps. Ixxii. 10 with that of Shebha. In Isa. xlv. 14 the Sabeans are described, like the KushThese indicaites in xviii. 2 and 7, as of large stature.
tions point to a people closely related to the Kushites,

whose country lay between Kush and Shebha. Hence Sebha has been identified with Saba, according to Strabo
(xvi. 4, 8, 10)

the

name

of a harbor
site of

on the west coast of

the

Red
;

saua

the modern city of Masor Sabae, that of a city farther northward. Comp.
Sea, near the

SGA, ii. 387 ff. The Hawilah of ii. 1 1 was in northern Arabia, and, although it would be unsafe to take for granted that the Priestly author located his in the
Glaser,

same region, the fact that the remaining sons of Kush must be sought in Arabia favors the opinion that the two are one. So Glaser (SGA, ii. 323 ff.), who locates Hawilah in "the district of Yemamaand el-Kasim, toward the north end of the Persian Gulf, i. e., strictly speaking, central
is

and northeast Arabia."

Comp.

Delitzsch.

Sabhtah

perhaps Sabata, the ancient capital of Hadramaut, in southern Arabia. Comp. Glaser, SGA, ii. 387. Ra'mah, which occurs in Eze. xxvii. 22 in connection with Shebha,
probably the place of the same name in southwestern Arabia, of which mention is made in Sabean inscriptions (Halevy), rather than the Rhegma located by Ptolemy
is

(vl 7, 14)

on the Persian Gulf.

Comp.

Glaser,

SGA,

X.
ii.

7,

8]

COMMENTS
Sabhtekha must
also have been
in

243

387.

southern

Arabia, perhaps, as Glaser (SGA, ii. 404) suggests, as far east as Oman, but it has not thus far been satisfac-

The only branch of the family of torily identified. carried to the third generation is that of Ra'mah, to

Kush

whom

are given two sons. The first bears a name, Shebha, familiar to readers of the Old Testament as that of the

whose

country whose queen visited Solomon (i Kgs. x. I ff.), and principal products were gold and incense (i Kgs. x. It is the country of the Sa2, 10; Eze. xxvii. 22, etc.)

beans, whose capital was Marib, in southwestern Arabia. In the eighth century B. c. when this people paid tribute
to Tiglath-pileser III. (Schrader, KB, ii. 54 f ; KAT, 145 f.), they seem to have extended their territory, or
.

their settlements, to the northern end of the peninsula. They played a leading part in the history of Arabia until

about 300

B. c. See Die. Bib., art. Arabia. In v. 28 Shebha is a son of Yoktan, while in xxv. 3 both Shebha and Dedhan are grandsons of Abraham. The name of this second son of Ra'mah is also familiar as that of a

part of Arabia. According to Eze. xxv. 13 it extended northward as far as the border of 'Edhom. Glaser (SGA,

395 ff.) locates it north of Medina. The name is preserved in that of Daidan, a ruined city west of Teima, the Tema with which Dedhan is associated in Isa. xxi.
ii.

14 and Dedan.

Jer. xxv.

23.

See Die. Bib.

y

art.

Arabia and

8. The next thing should now be a list of the sons of Sabhtekha or one of the remaining sons of Kush, or, if the author could not, or would not, go farther with the

descendants of
actually follows

Ham,
is

a conclusion like that in

v. 5.

What

a statement that, in addition to the five

sons already mentioned in v. 6, Kush begot Nimrodh; a statement whose phraseology at once betrays its Yah-

244

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
If,

[X. 8

wistic origin.*

however,

it is

Yahwistic, the question

arises, whether the name Kush here has the same meanThe context supplies the answer. ing that it had in v. 7.

From

v. 10 it is plain that the author has in mind, not Ethiopia, but, as in ii. 13, Babylonia, and that therefore

the apparent relation between Nimrodh and the Kushites The idea seems to be, of v. 7 is an editorial creation, f
that the primitive inhabitants of Babylonia were Kasshites.

From them sprang Nimrodh, the

first

to be-

potentate, exercising over those he ruled the authority of force, the first conqueror, in the earth. Nimrodh has been identified with Gilgamesh, the hero of

come a

He was a Kasshite the great epic of the Babylonians. (Jastrow, RBA, 480), and a mighty conqueror (Schrader, KB, vi. i, 118 f. Jastrow, RBA, 473 f.). Moreover he
;

was a native of Marad, whose name bears a striking resemblance to Nimrodh (Frd. Delitzsch, WLP, 220). The
prominence given to Babylon in v. 10, however, favors the view that he is none other than the patron deity of that city, and that his name is but a corruption of Marduk or

Amaruduk

(Wellhausen, CH, 309

f.

;

Die. Bib.,

art.

Nim;

* The verb here used,

"rv is in

the

first

and not in the third (Hiphil} as in v. 3, ever, have the latter. f This does not mean that there was no relation between the Kasshites of Babylonia and the Ethiopians. There is a growing conviction among scholars that the two peoples, widely as they finally became separated, belonged to the same stock that, in fact, the latter were emigrants from the region of the Persian Gulf. See
;

(KaT) stem, as in iv. 18 etc. The Samaritans, how-

WLP, 531!.; Glaser, SGA, ii. 3 26ff.; Petrie, HE, question for the present, however, is not, What are the facts in the case? but, What was the author's belief and teaching
Frd. Delitzsch,
12
ff.
\.

The

with reference to

it ? Now it seems clear that, if this verse is by the same author as w. 26-30, where the tribes of Arabia are all derived from the Shemite Yoktan, he can hardly have identified his Kush with the father of the Ethiopians. Comp. Enc. Bib., art. Cush, 2.

X. 8-io]
;

COMMENTS

245

to whom the foundation of Uruk as well as Babyrod) See Schrader, KB, lon seems to have been attributed.

VL 38

ff.

In either case the author

will

have reduced a

mythical character to credible proportions.

Comp.
v.

Ball,

LE, 44 f9. The development

of the latter half of

8

is

inter-

rupted by the introduction of a further description of Nimrodh as mighty in hunting, like many of the Assyrian kings (Ragozin, Assyria, 413
f.).

The phrase bevii.

fore

Yahweh,

like to

God in

Jon.

iii.

3 and Acts

20,

apparently denotes the highest degree of the quality in

Comp. Keil. His prowess became proverbial, question. he so that, even in the author's day, the Hebrews
would hardly have put the name Yahweh into the mouth in praise of a successful hunter said, Like of a gentile Nimrodh mighty in hunting before Yahweh. 10. After this digression, probably not a part of the original story, the narrative proceeds with an outline of Nimrodh' s dominions. The beginning, nucleus, of his

kingdom

consisted of four cities, and, naturally, the terThese cities he had not built, ritory belonging to them. but acquired in some other way, before he attempted

to extend his

sway over Mesopotamia. The first and most important was Babhel, Babylon, on the Euphrates, a city of uncertain antiquity,* which rose into prominence in the reign of Hammurabi (2287-2232 B. c.f) and held
* In the second story of creation (Schrader,
19)
it is

LE,

one of the two
is

cities,

creation at the beginning

KB, vi. i, 40 f.; Ball, Eridu being the other, whose expressly ascribed to Marduk. Na-

one of his inscriptions (Schrader, KB, iii. (c. 3750 B. c.) king of Babylon, and in one of the so-called omens of the latter (Schrader, KB, iii. I, 102 f.) he seems to be described as the founder of the city.
bonidus (555-538 B. c.) 2, 84 f.) calls Sargon I.
in

f

These are the dates given by Frd. Delitzsch (GBA, Appendix).

Comp. Hommel,

AHT,

118

ff.

;

also Rogers,

HBA,

i.

338.

246
its

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[X. 10

position in Babylonia until the death of Alexander the The second city was Great, or nearly twenty centuries. 'Orekh,* Ass. Uruk, which was situated on the Euphrates

below Babhel, at a site now called Warka. It was at least as old as Babylon, appearing as an important religious centre in the earliest records of southern Babylonia, f 'Akkadh, a familiar name for northern Babylonia, is here a

probably the one that was either built or rebuilt by Sargon I. for his residence (Schrader, KB, iii. i, 102 f. Ball, LE, 5 1 f.). Frd. Delitzsch ( WLP, 209 ff.) identifies this Akkad or Agade J with the southern half of the twin city of Sippar, on the left bank of the Euphrates above Babhel the half sometimes designated as Sippar of Annunitum (Ishtar). See also McCurdy, HPM, i. 107 f. This
city,
; ;

hypothesis, however, has not met with universal favor and the same is the case with his identification (

;

WLP

y

225
95

ff.)

of
II.

Sargon
f.
:

Kalneh with Kulunu, among his conquests.
it

Enc. Bib.,

Kalneh was,
*

arts. Accad was probably not the place mentioned

a place mentioned by See Schrader, KAT, and Calneh. Wherever

under the same, or nearly the same, name
tion of the Assyrian
sion. f
It also is

in

Am.

vi.

2

This, instead of 'Erekh, is the form required by the vocalizaname as well as the reading of the Greek Ver-

mentioned as one of the oldest

cities in the
vi. i,

world in
Ball,

the second story of creation (Schrader,
19).

KB,

38

f.

;

LE,

A

Gilgamesh made temple to Ishtar was

it

his capital (Schrader, KB, vi. i, 118 f.). built there by Ur-gur, king of Ur, c. 2800
i,

B. c. (Schrader,

KB,

iii.
i.

78
f.

f.).

See also McCurdy,

HPM,

i.

119

f.

;

Rogers,

HBA,

291

\ The identity of 'Akkadh and the city whose name is usually written A-ga-de, discovered by George Smith (AD, 225), appears from an inscription of Nebuchrezzar I. (Schrader, KB, iii. i, 170 f.)

where Ishtar

is

called bilit (alu)

A k-ka-di, patroness of the city of
cor-

Akkadu. Comp. Tiele, BA G, 76. The note on this passage in the author's Amos should be
rected.

X.

io, ii]

COMMENTS
9
;

247

and

Isa. x.

since the latter seems to have been in north-

ern Syria, while the former was in the land of Shin'ar. In xiv. i this name, which some of the best authorities
identify with the

Shumer of the inscriptions,* appears to mean only Babylon and the country immediately about
Here, however, as in
at the northern,
xi.
I,

it.

Isa. xi.

1 1,
;

etc.,

it

un-'

doubtedly includes the whole of Babylonia

for

'Akkadh

was end

and 'Orekh almost

at the southern,

of that region, f

of Nimrodh extended beyond Babythat land he went forth northward, along the Tigris, to 'Asshur, Assyria which in Mic. v. 6 This statement is in is called the land of Nimrodh.
ii.

The kingdom

lonia.

From

;

essential

agreement with the best knowledge obtainable
;

with reference to the origin of Assyria whose language, customs, religion, in fact its civilization as a whole, evidently

came from Babylonia.

See McCurdy,

HPM,

i

209 f.

The

uncertain.

date at which migration northward began is The first capital was Asshur, the city from

which the new state took its name, on the western bank of the Tigris, midway between the upper and the lower Zab. Its history can be traced as far back as the middle
of the nineteenth century
its ruler.
ii.

2

f.

in his

B. c., when Ishmi-dagan was See Schrader, KB, iii. i,42f. Rogers, HBA, This city the author ignores, probably because, His time, it had lost its more ancient importance.
;

* So Frd. Delitzsch (WLP, 198 f.), who supposes the one to have come from the other through an intermediate form Shunger. See
also Schrader,

KA T,
n.

1

18

f.

;

Budde,

BU,

385.

Compare, however,

Meyer,

GA,

i.

129

f It is taken for granted that the phrase in question is intended to define the location of all the cities named, and not merely Kalneh,

although

it is

admitted that the latter

is

a possible interpretation.

See McCurdy,

HPM,

i.

132 n.

248

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
is

[X.

11,

12

information

built by

Nimrodh was Nineweh
left

to the effect that the first city of Assyria (Ass. Nina or Ninua),

which was situated on the
the
site of

the

modern

city of Mosul.

in the nineteenth century B. have been the capital for any length of time before Sennacherib (705-681) rebuilt and fortified it. Thenceforward it remained the royal residence until the overthrow of the empire. See Schrader, The second T, 96 ff.*

bank of the Tigris opposite, It also was a city but it does not seem to c.,

KA

by Nimrod, Rehobhoth-ir (Avenues-of-the-city), has not been certainly located, but Frd. Delitzsch ( WLP, 260 f.) identifies it with Rebit-ir, a suburb north and northeast of Nineweh, mentioned by Sargon II. (Schrader, KB, ii. 46 f.) and Esarhaddon (KB, ii. 126 f.) which, of course, must have arisen some time after the city proper. Comp. Schrader, KAT, loof. Kalah (Ass. Kal/m) was
city built
;

a much younger city than Nineweh, having been founded by Shalmaneser I. c. 1300 B. c. Its site is now covered by a mound called Nimrud, on the left bank of the Tigris, in the angle between that river and the Upper Zab, about twenty miles south of Nineweh. It was rebuilt by As-

mained the
Sargon

It reshurnasirpal (884-860), who made it his capital. favorite residence of the Assyrian kings until

II. took possession of the new town, Dur-sharhe had built for the seat of his government which ruken, ii. 46 KB, ff.). (Schrader, Its original name 12. Finally Nimrodh built Resen. was probably Reshenu but it is not probable that it was
;

the place of that name connected with the canal built by Sennacherib (Schrader, KB, il 1 16 f.), for that was north
*

tions of

McCurdy (HPM, i. 210 f.), interpreting the Nina of the Gudea (Schrader, KB, iii. i, 26 ff.) as meaning
c.

inscrip-

the pa-

troness of Nineweh, instead of Lagash, carries the history of the

former back to

3000

B. c.

Comp. Jastrow,

RBA,

86

ff.

X.

12, is]

COMMENTS
Nineweh

249

(Frd. Delitzsch, WLP, 187 f.), the city founded by Nimrodh was between Nineweh and Kalah, perhaps where the village of Selamieh now

or east of

while

stands (Menant).

In the phrase just quoted

Resen,

Nineweh, and Kalah are treated as

distinct cities.

The

next statement unites them, with Rehobhoth-'ir, into a complex described as the great city. This is the Nine-

weh of Jon. iii. 2 f., "three days' .journey" in extent. Hence the clause is probably a later addition to the story
Nimrodh, the date of which, in hardly be earlier than 700 B. c.*
of
1

its

present form, can

3.

The story of Nimrodh being finished,
is

the genealogy

proper

continued, not, however, in the style of the The remaining names in the line of Priestly narrator. are of Yahwistic origin. They are all introduced

Ham

by the term begot,
but this
*
is

as if they represented individuals not the case, as appears most clearly in this
;

The

prevalent view

is

that

w.

8,

10-12 entire should be re-

ferred to the second Yahwist, and therefore to a date not much, if any, earlier than the beginning of the seventh century B. c. Dill-

man, however, dissented from this opinion, and there are signs of a disposition to reconsider the question of their authorship. Thus, Holzinger in his Genesis expresses himself as doubtful whether the 2 1 passage should be referred to J or J (xxv.), admitting that Nimrodh the individual does not harmonize with the rest of the former's table (101). He might have added that, on the other hand, v. 8 See iv. strongly recalls the style and purpose of the first Yahwist. 20 ff. vi. 4 ix. 20 xi. 6. To meet the objection based on the dis;

;

;

crepancy between this story and xi. i ff., Dillmann simply transposes them. The treatment of the last clause of v. 12 as editorial removes a historical difficulty for, although Nineweh did not eclipse the other cities mentioned until the time of Sennacherib, it had more than once been the temporary capital of the empire. Asshurnasirpal
;

(884-860 B. c.), Schrader, KB,

e. g.,
i.

resided there until he restored Kalah.
;

See

50

ff.

Rogers,

HBA,

ii.

46

ff.

250

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[X. 13

verse and the next, where the names are all plural.* Moreover, some of them are familiar as the names of well

known

This is not the case with that of the peoples. of first-begotten Misrayim, Ludhites. It at once suggests the Lydians (Knobel), but the fact that
is
it,

or the

almost always (four times out corresponding singular, of five) elsewhere associated with Put,| and twice with

Kush also, supports the natural inference from the present connection, that the author had in mind a people in The theory of or near Egypt, and native to that region.
that the Ludhites are the ff.), therefore, or Lutu, i. e., the Egyptians proper as distinguished from the types mingled with them, is to be pref erred. J

Ebers (ABM, 96

Rutu

The Rutu appear

first on a list of types in Egypt under the nineteenth dynasty (ABM, 93). Second on the same list are the Aamu, a Semitic tribe who pastured their

herds along the eastern border of the country.
i.

These

wandering herdsmen, also called An (Meyer, GA, 43), Ebers (ABM, 98 ff.) identifies with the 'Anamites. The Lehabhites are supposed to be the same with the Lubhites of Nah. iii. 9, i. e., the Libyans (Eg.Rebu QiLebu), whose country bounded Lower Egypt on the west. Being employed as mercenaries by the Egyptians, they finally became the ruling class. Sheshonk and other kings men*

The

fiction in the

term begot required that the names should
but with
J~IW,

be used without the
accusative.
t

article,

the sign of the definite

Comp.

w.

16-18.

In Isa.

Ixvi. 19, for

blQ> Pul, read, with the Greek version,
xlvi. 9,

BIS Put.
t

Stade (PJ,

5

ff.)

reads D'Dlbf Libyans, here and in Jer.
substitutes the singular of the

while

Toy (SBOT)

same name
all

for

"Tib in Eze. xxvii. 10

and xxx.

5,

and Cheyne (SBO7*) omits
as

the

names from

Isa. Ixvi. 19.

He

explains the

Hebrew

D^3^

compounded

of the two

Egyptian words an, nomad, and amu, herdsman.

X.

13, 14]

COMMENTS

251

See tioned in the Old Testament were of Libyan origin. 317 f. ; Die. Bib., art. Lubim. On the Meyer, GA, i.
list

of types already twice cited they appear

under the

See Ebers, ABM, hites, according to Ebers (ABM,

name Temhu.
Ptah

1 1

93. 2 ff.), are those of

The Naphtu-

Memphis and the whose patron deity was Ptah but surrounding country, Erman (ZAW, 1890, 118 f.) derives the name from Pe* and there temhi, an Egyptian designation for the Delta is not much choice between the two opinions. 14. The Fathrusites are the people of Pathros or Upper Egypt (Eg. Petres\ whose political and religious centre was Thebes. See Jer. xliv. i.f The name Kaslu(na-Ptah),
i. e.,

the inhabitants of

;

:

said (Die. Bib., art. Caphtor) to occur in an inOmbo, in Upper Egypt, scription in the temple of as that of a country conquered by Ptolemy XIII. ; but

het

is

Kom
it

there

is

no indication where

was

situated.

It is there-

fore of no assistance in locating the Kasluhites, whom Ebers (ABM, 120 ff.) and others suppose to have occu-

From pied the coast between the Delta and Philistia. the Kasluhites, according to the present text, went forth
the Pelishtites,
i.

e.,

the Philistines.

In

Am.

ix. 7,

how-

ever, the Philistines are said to have come from KaphThe relative clause is therefore probably a gloss that tor.

out
*

should have been inserted after Kaphtorites.ij: Withit this name probably meant here, as in Deu. ii. 23,

the Philistines
hites.

who, since in i Sam. xxx. 14, Eze. xxv. Erman changes the text, making it read DTTBnB Pathmu;

f

In Eze. xxix. 14 and xxx. 14 Pathros seems to be a synonym
it

for Egypt. J Ball and others transfer

to this position, but there is

no

probability that

occupies.

ever had any other place in the text than it now If they wished to restore it to its original position,
it it

they should have removed

to the margin.

252
1 6,

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[X. 14-16

to have

and Zph. ii. 5 they are called Kerethites, are believed been of Cretan origin. See Enc. Bib., art. CJiecomp.
ix.

rethites ;
15.

art.
ff.

Caphtor.

In

25

the Kena'anite and the Phoenician

were represented as brothers.

Here Kena'an

is

the

father of several children, Sidhon not the ancient and its inhabitants like Sidonians in alone, but, capital
i

- being
Heta

Kgs.

xi.

5 and elsewhere, the Phoenicians as a people his first-born. His second son was Heth, the

Egyptians and the Hatti of the Assyrians, whom both of these great nations waged long and bloody wars, and to whom Sargon II. gave the decisive blow in 717 B. c. Their original seat appears to have been in Cappadocia, but they early pressed into northern Syria, whence they continually threatened Palestine. According to Gen. xxiii. I ff., there were Hitof the

a powerful people with

tites in

Hebron as early as Abraham's time. When the Hebrews returned from Egypt, there were still remnants of them in various places (Num. xiii. 29), and they did
;

See 2 Sam. not entirely disappear after the Conquest. as a part of It is these southern ff. etc. Hittites, 3 the population of Palestine, who, to judge from v. 19, are
xi.

meant
i.

in this passage.
ff.
;

See further McCurdy,
ff.

HPM>

190

Ball,

LE, 95
;

16. The list of Kena'an's family, in its present form, gives him eleven sons but the names yet to be noticed are later additions to the original table, as is shown (/) by

their form,

with the

all gentilic nouns in the singular, and (2) by the fact that some of them represent communities outside the limits of the territory

they are

article,

allotted to the Kena'anites in v.

19.

The

first

of these

added names

is

the Yebhusite, a
29; Jud.
i.

collective designation

for the ancient inhabitants of Jerusalem

and

its vicinity.

See Num.

xiil

21.

The 'Emorite,

like the

X.

16, i?]

COMMENTS

253

Kena'anite, sometimes means the original inhabitants of Palestine as a whole (xv. 16; etc.), but here, as in xiv. 7, in the southern part e.g., it appears to denote a tribe of the country. See further McCurdy, HPM, i. 159 f.

The Girgashite, according to Jos. xxiv. the Jordan but the tribe bearing the
;

11, lived

west of

name cannot be

more
17.

definitely located.

Comp.
a

The Hiwwite
cities

is

name

Die. Bib., art. Girgashite. given to the inhabitants
etc.

of certain
Palestine.

Shekem, Gibeon,
xxxiv.

in

Central
four

See

2; Jos.

ix.

7,

17.*

The

names thus far examined are familiar, at least three of them being found in all the editorial lists of the tribes of Palestine in the historical books of the Old Testament.f Those that follow are found only here and in
the corresponding passage in Chronicles (i Chr. i. 15 f.). The 'Arkite represents the inhabitants of 'Arka, the ruins of which are found about twelve miles north of
Tripolis.
It

was

a very ancient city,

being mentioned in

*

The
2,

only passages in conflict with this statement are Gen.

In the first >inn> the Jos. xi. 3, Jud. Hi. 3. evidently an error for the ^"inn the Horite, of v. 20.
xxxvi.
3 the correct reading is in which the Hiwwite, as

Hiwwite,

is

In Jos. xi. doubtless that of the Greek Version (AB),

elsewhere, immediately precedes the the Hittite who is under Herman ; and Jud. iii. See Moore /. /. 3 should probably be made to agree therewith. | The four, with the addition of the Hittite, the Kena'anite, and
Yebhusite, and
it is

the Perizzite, occur Deu. vii. i ; Jos. iii. 10; xxiv. 11. All but the Girgashite, with the same additions, are found Ex. iii. 8, 17; Deu. xx. 17 Jos. ix. i xi. 3 xii. xxiii. 23 ; xxxiii. 2; xxxiv.

n

;

;

;

;

with the Hittite and the Kentfanite, Ex. xiii. 5 Hittite and the Perizzite, i Kgs. ix. 20 2 Chr. viii. 8
;
;

;

and with the
7.

All but the

Hiwwite, with the Hittite, the Kena'anite, and the Perizzite, appear in Neh. ix. 8; and with further additions in Gen. xv. I9ff. The Yebhusite and the ''Emorite are found in a peculiar list in Ezr. ix. i, and the Hiwwite in another in Ex. xxiii. 28. For the order in which the names appear, see Driver, Deu. 97.

254

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[X. 17-19

the Tell el-Amarna letters (Schrader, KB,v. i. I/of.), as well as in the annals of Tiglath-pileser III. (KB, ii. 28 f.). Later it became known as the birthplace of Alexander
Severus.
Sin, the Sianu of the Assyrian inscriptions

(KB, ii. 26 f.), whence the Sinite, was on the coast not far from 'Arka. 1 8. The 'Arwadhite is the inhabitant of 'Arwadh, a city and island, now Ruad, just off the coast north of It is mentioned in the annals of Thothmes III. Tripolis. (c. 1475; Petrie, HE, ii. 113), and frequently by the Assyrian king Asshurnasirpal (884-860) and his successors. See Schrader, KAT, 104! etc. Semar, whence the Semarite, is the modern Sumra. It, also, was a very old city, just north of 'Arka. See Petrie, HE, ii. 114;
;

Schrader, KAT, 105 KB, v. i, 98 ff. et pas. Finally, the Hamathite represents the people of Hamath, now Kama, on the Orontes, and the country bounding the Promised Land on the north (Num. xxxiv. 8), of which it was the capital. David added Hamath to his dominions (2 Sam. viii. 10), and Jeroboam II. recovered it for The Assyrians conquered and Israel (2 Kgs. xiv. 28).
;

reconquered about 720 B.

it,

finally

reducing

it

to lasting submission

c.

See Schrader,
is

clause of this verse

KAT, 105 f. the proper conclusion of

The
v.

final

15.

It

informs the reader that afterward, i. e., after the birth of Sidhon and t*eth, the families of the Kena'anite,

which the original author did not attempt to enumerate, spread themselves abroad over the territory to be
described.
19.

The western border

of this

territory extended

from Sidhon in the north, along the Mediterranean, southward as far as * Gerar, a city the ruins of which, * On the rendering as far as for rON2 and rONS T2, see xiii.
10
;

i

Sam.

xvii.

52

;

i

Kgs.

xviii.

46;

etc.

X. 19]
six miles
el-Jerar.

COMMENTS
See Thomson, LB,
its
;
.

255

southwest of Gaza, now bear the name Kirbet
i.

196

ff.

chiefly interesting for

associations with

The place is Abraham and

xxvi. 17 ff. The phrase unto Isaac. See xx. i ff 'Azzah (Gaza) seems to be an explanatory gloss, added because 'Azzah was better known than Gerar. The southeastern corner of the country is Sedhom (Sodom) famous

as the principal' of the cities destroyed by the terrible visitation described in chapter xix. Its situation is disSome (Dillmann) place it at, or in, the shallow puted.

southern end of the Dead Sea. This, however, is not the view that finds support in the most important passages In xix. Sedhom is repeatedly bearing on the subject.
(vv. 17, 25, 28, 29)
lit.

represented as located in the Plain,

Round. But this Plain, according to xiii., was the Plain of the Yarden (Jordan), i. e., the oval tract on the lower course of the river at the head of the Dead Sea, seen from the hills near Bethel lying between them and
So'ar (vv. iof.). Compare xix. 28, by the same author (J), where Abraham looks toward, but does not see, the site of the doomed cities. Still more definite is Deu. xxxiv. Plain is described as the Plain of Yerwhere the 3 (J),
If- the author of xiv., like the Chronicler eho (Jericho). (2 Chr. xx. 2), identified Hasason-tamar with 'En-gedhi,

he also (vv. 7 ff.) must have located Sedhom at the head of the Dead Sea. See Thomson, LB, 371 ff G. A. f. Smith, HGHL, 505 f. Tristram, LI, 354 comp.
i.
.

;

;

is probably the idea in the present passage, the author thinking of the southern border as running, first The to, and then along, the sea, to the north end of it.

This

mention of Sedhom would naturally suggest to one familiar with chapter xiv. or Deu. xxix. 23 'Amorah, 'Adhmah, and Sebhoyim but, since one place was better
;

than four for the author's purpose,

it

is

probable that

256

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
last

[X. 19-21

three were added by a less thoughtful copyLesha', seems to correspond to the 'Azzah in the preceding phrase, but it is not so

these
ist.*

The remaining name,
since,

easily explained, no place of this

so far as
in the

name

known, there was neighborhood of Sedhom.
is

Perhaps, as Wellhausen suggests (CH, 15), the name is a corruption of that of Layish, afterward Dan (Jud. xviii.
29),

the place that marked the northeastern corner of the

country of the Kena'anites. f The traditional view, that Lesha' is Callirrhoe, east of the Dead Sea, is certainly
mistaken.}
20. The paragraph closes, as did the first (v. 5), with a formal summary of its contents. Here, however, the order is not, lands, tongues, families, nations, but, as in
(

v. 31,

families, tongues, lands, nations.
collateral
in

The
lastly,

branches having received due attention,
ff.,

harmony with the method employed through12
ff.,

out Genesis (xxv. l
2ff.),
(c)

19

ff.

;

xxxvi.

I

ff.

;

xxxvii.

The Families of Shem
line,

(uv.

21-32), constituting

The opening clause, children were born to Shem also, reminds one of iv. 26, and thus betrays its Yahwistic authorship. The
the main
are introduced.
21.

* Ball omits them
t

all

as secondary.
to read HlZJb or Dtt?b.' the

For 2tt?b Wellhausen proposes

accusative of tt^b- Holzinger's objection that, if the place meant were Layish, the name would be preceded by fOWi instead of "TO* like the names of Gerar and Sedhom, is not conclusive; since, in

both particles are employed. this whole verse differently, substituting a compilation from xv. 18 and Deu. xi. 24; viz., And the border of the Kena'anite was front the river of Misrayim to the great river, the river Perath [Euphrates], and to the Western Sea.
i

Sam.

xvii. 52,

t

The Samaritans read

For

DrPtQ

the Samaritans read

Dmnb here, as in v. 31.

X.

21, 22]

COMMENTS

257

patriarch is described first as the father, the progenitor, of all the sons of 'Ebher, i. e., the Hebrews ; the object of the author in so describing him being to remind his

readers that he has at last reached the part of the table that has especial interest for them.* Comp. Delitzsch.

At
the

the same time he recalls the fact that Shem, though last to appear, was the older brother of Yepheth,f

and therefore, as in ix. 18, the eldest son of Noah. 22. This interesting verse is followed by a brief extract from the Priestly table, according to which the first of Shem's sons was 'Elam. By this name (Ass. Elamtu) is meant the people of the highlands about the head of
the Persian Gulf, east of the river Tigris. the height of their power about 2300 B.
c.,

They reached when they

conquered Babylonia and, according to chapter xiv., extended their dominion to the Mediterranean Sea. See
Rogers, HBA, i. 380 ff. RaLater they came into conflict gozin, Chaldea, 219 with the Assyrians, by whom they were finally (645 B. c.), reduced to subjection. See Meyer, GA, i. 459 Rogers, HBA, ii. 269 ff. Ragozin, Assyria, 399 ff. 'Asshur, Shem's second son, can only denote the Assyrians who,

Meyer, GA,

i.

135

ff .

;

;

ff.

;

;

;

however, according to
ite origin.
is

v.

n, were

of Kushite,

/.

e.,

Ham-

discrepancy reminds the reader that he not here dealing with the same author as he was in

The

harmonistic addition

* Budde (BU, 221) suspects that >33 b^ all the sons of, is a but since, in this connection, the father of 'Ebher could only mean what is meant by the present reading, there seems to be no sufficient reason for the supposed interpolation. It is more probable that the. whole of the descriptive phrase has been inserted, but not, as Bacon (GG, 1 1 7) suggests, from an earlier
;

source.
t The punctuation of the original indicates that the Massoretes understood this phrase as the Greek translators rendered it viz.,
:

as meaning the brother of Yepheth, the elder.

258

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[X. 22

'Arpakhshadh was early (Bochart) idenwith Arapachitis (Ass. Arbaha ; Schrader, KB, ii. 88 f.), a region on the Upper Zab, northeast of Nineweh. To this view, however, there are serious objections viz.,
that passage.
tified
;

ignores important elements in the name 'Ar; pakhshadh and (2) that it excludes the most important branch of the stock of Shem. The latter of these con(/)

that

it

siderations has led many, following Josephus (AJ, i. 6, 4), to prefer to believe that 'Arpakhshadh is only another name for Babylonia and the Babylonians.* The latest

suggestion (Cheyne), arising from an attempt to do justice to the etymological as well as the historical side of the question, is that 'Arpakhshadh combines the names of

two

of the sons of Shem, 'Arpah, Arrapachitis, and KeThis theory requires one to believe shedh, Chaldea. that an editor (Rp), having mistaken the two names for

tuted

one, used the mistaken designation in v. 24 and substiit for Keshedh in xi. 10 ff. which seems improbable.
:

See, however, Enc. Bib.,

art.

Arphaxad ;

also xxii. 22,

where Keedh f is among the sons of Nahor, the brother In v. 13 the Ludhites were tentatively of Abraham. identified with the Rutu of Egypt, as the context seemed

The context here forbids one to suppose to require. In that the same people was in the mind of the author.
fact,

Ludh can hardly be any other than the Lydians, who, about the beginning of the sixth century B. c., had pushed their conquests eastward to the very border of the Median empire (Meyer, GA, 486 f. Ragozin, Media, 217 ff.), and who remained one of the great powers of the period until 546 B. c., when they were
;

* A modification of this view makes the name a compound from a conjectural ^"IM (Ar. 'urfat), boundary, and *TK7D (Ass. Kaldii), Chaldea. See Schrader, KAT, 112 f.
t

With a

ttf,

like

D^to

Chaldeans.

X.

22, 23]

COMMENTS
is

259

the Aramaeans. overthrown by Cyrus. Finally, 'Aram According to Am. ix. 7, their original home was Kir, which must have been somewhere in the direction of

See Am. i. 5. In xxii. 21 'Aram is the grandAssyria. son of Nahor, of Haran, in northwestern Mesopotamia, a region which the Hebrews called 'Aram-naharayim ('Aram of two rivers ; xxiv. 10) and Paddan-'aram (xxv.
and where the Assyrians found the Aramaeans (Aramu), when they began to extend their borders westward. See Schrader, KB, i. 32 f. By 'Aram, however, the Hebrews usually meant what they sometimes took pains to designate as 'Aram-dammes's'ekh (2 Sam. viii. 6), i. e., the country of which Damascus was the capital. They also distinguished an 'Aram-beth-rehobh near Dan (2 Sam. x. 6 Jud. xviii. 28), an 'Aram-ma'akhah farther westward (i Chr. xix. 6; 2 Sam. xx. 14), and an 'Aramzobhah between Damascus and Hamath (2 Sam. x. 6). From other sources the Aramaeans are known to have
20),
;

spread themselves far beyond these limits, mingling with other races in Assyria and Babylonia and penetrating southward into the Arabian desert, while Aramaic be-

came the
2 Kgs.

international language of

Western Asia.
t

See
art.

xviii.

26;*Frd. Delitzsch,
;

WLP
84

257

f.;

Meyer,

GA,

i.

401

McCurdy,

HPM,

L

f. ;

Enc. Bib.,

Aram.
23. There are only two of the sons of Shem in whom the Priestly author betrays any further interest. One is 'Arpakhshadh but he, being in the line through which
;

the Hebrews traced their descent, is neglected for the time being, to be given his place in that line in chapter The other is 'Aram, to whom are given four sons. xi.

The

first

is

'Us,*

who appears

in xxii. 21 (J), not as the

See also xxxvi. 28 (P), son, but as the uncle of 'Aram. * Fpr the read Samaritans Y"TC7> \nn Hus.

2<5o

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[X. 23, 24

where he is a grandson of e'ir the Horite. According Lam. iv. 21, 'Us seems to include 'Edhom.* This would indicate that 'Us was northwestern Arabia, where the author of the book of Job also, who makes the patriarch an Arab (i. 3) and represents him as being plundered by the Sabeans (i. 15), no doubt located it.f This being taken for granted, it is more probable that, as Glaser suggests (SGA, ii. 421 f.), Hul and Gether were in the northern and northeastern part of the same country, than that either of them was in northern Syria J espeto
;

cially since

there

is

not
it,

much doubt

that

Mash

is

the

so called by the Assyrians, viz., the great Syro-Arabian desert west of Babylonia. See Schrader, KB, ii. 220 f. ; vi. i, 202 f. comp. Glaser,
;

region, or a part of

SGA,
24.
It is

ii.

419

f.

This verse

is

commonly

attributed to the editor
;

not the continuation of the preceding. who compiled the
but, since v. 25 can never

have imand the language here used is is better, with Bacon (GG, Yahwistic, 1[ 117), to refer it to the author of the Yahwistic genealogy. To compresent table (Rp) mediately followed
it:

v. 21,

plete the connection with
* In Jer. xxv. 20

v.

21, supply,

And the firstborn

f., where 'Us occurs with 'Edhom, 'Us is probSee the Greek Version. ii. 411 ff.) inclines to think that 'Us is really a synonym of Put, which he takes to mean western Arabia, overlooking the fact that both names are from Priestly sections of the chapter, and therefore cannot well refer to the same region.

ably interpolated. f Glaser (SGA,

t

On

Hul

Frd. Delitzsch's attempt ( WLP, 259)10 identify <tfr and with an Ussa and a Hulia of the Assyrian inscriptions, see

Schrader,

KB,

i.

86

f.,

1

10

f.,

146

f.

For E7D the Samaritans read Sltftt, as in See also the Greek Version. ~]tt?tt, Meshekh.
If

v. 30;

i

Chr.

i.

17,

The verb
it

lV

is

here used in the
is in

first

(Kal) stem in the sense

of beget, as

always

Yahwistic passages.

See

/.

26.

X.

24, 25]
'

COMMENTS

261

of S/tem was Arpakhshadh, or something equivalent, which must have been omitted by the compiler, when w. 22 f. were inserted. The name of the son of 'Arpakhshadh, Shelah, like that of 'Enosh in iv. 26, is probably symbolical, but its significance is uncertain. This Shelah begot 'Ebher.* The name, lit. crossing, seems intended
to

embody

a tradition to the effect that the original

home

of the

Shemites of Arabia as well as Palestine was be-

yond the Euphrates. The corresponding gentilic, 'Ibhri, Hebrew, however, is used only of Abraham and his descendants through Isaac and Jacob, and that chiefly in cases in which a contrast between them and their neighbors
xliii.

is

32).

expressed or implied (xiv. 13; xxxix. 14; xl. 15 The tradition with reference to their origin
explicit.

;

was uniform and
Jos. xxiv. 2 (E)
25.
;

See

xii.

5 (P)
i.

;

xxiv.

i

ff.

(J)

;

comp. Meyer, GA,

Pelegh.
Babhel.

The elder of the two sons was The name signifies division, separation. To a Hebrew it would naturally suggest the dispersion from
It is

289. bornf to 'Ebher

by the causal
ix.

not strange, therefore, to find it explained clause, for in his days the earth, or,
viii.

was separated. See This clause, however, is 19; comp. Jub. without doubt an interpolation, since the author of the table would hardly have called attention to a story which
strictly speaking, its population,

6

ff.

contradicts his teaching with reference to the origin of the peoples and their languages. The second son of 'Ebher was Yoktan. He has generally been identified

with the Kahtan of the
there
*
lah
t
is

Mohammedan

genealogies; but

really

no connection between the two names,

The Greek version introduces a Kainan (Kenan) between Sheand 'Ebher here as in xi. 12 f. For "T^N the singular, read, with the Samaritans, lib's the,

plural.

262

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
is

[X. 25-28

and there

tribe or district in northern

no evidence that Kahtan originally a was recognized by Yemen

the Arabs as their

with this table.
sibility

eponym until they became acquainted Glaser (SGA, ii. 423) suggests the posof a connection between Yoktan and Katan, the

name
26.

of several districts in Arabia.

Some

This Yoktan had no fewer than thirteen sons. but the most of of their names are very familiar
;

them occur only here and
Chronicles
(i

in

Chr.

i.

20

ff.),

the parallel passage in the and are therefore difficult of
is

identification.

'Almodhadh

among

those that have
Bib., art.

not been identified.

For conjectures, see Die.

Al Modad;

Glaser,

SGA,

ii.

425.

another form of Salif or Sulaf, the Yemen, where similar names abound.
ii.

Sheleph perhaps name of a tribe in
is

See Glaser, SGA, Hadramaut, a district on the southern coast of Arabia, east of Yemen, of which the Sabhtah (Sabata) of v. 7 was anciently the capital.
425.

Hasarmaweth

is

Glaser (SGA, ii. 425) identifies Yerah with Mahrah, in eastern Hadramaut. Comp. Die. Bib., a.rt.Jera/i.
27.

The

Hadhoram *
;

traveler just quoted claims in Dauram, not far from

to

have found
ii.

Sana (SGA,

and "CTzal,t also Eze. xxvii. 19 (Davidson), in the 435) Azalla of the Assyrian inscriptions (Schrader, KB, ii. 220
f.),
;

which he locates northeast of Medina (SGA,

ii.

430) but in neither case is there sufficient evidence for a safe conclusion. Diklah, also, awaits identification.
28.

There

is

west of
is

Yemen

a place called 'Obhal J in the Tihama, (Glaser, SGA, ii. 427), but whether there
it

any connection between
* For
\

and the place or

tribe here

DTnn the

Samaritans read C-JVTNi 'Adoram.

For bn the Samaritans read I For SaiS the Samaritans read
Version omits the name altogether.

bm '/*/.
bw,

What, while the Greek

X. 28-30]

COMMENTS
is

263

'Abhima'el reimpossible to determine. Shebha is the Sabeans, as in v. 7, where, however, they are derived from Kush. 29. Thus far but two of the sons of Yoktan, Hasarmameant,
it

mains unidentified.

it

weth and Shebha, have been satisfactorily identified, but has been taken for granted that those not definitely located should be sought somewhere in the Arabian
It is

peninsula.

therefore natural to look for 'Ophir in

This location is favored by the apthe same region. next in the place, of Hawilah, which, in ii. 1 1, pearance, a related passage, can hardly mean anything but the Arabian desert
;

also

by

v. 30,

from which

it is

clear that all

the tribes or districts represented by the sons of Yoktan, wherever they were, were contiguous. See v. 19. Glaser (SGA, ii. 353 ff.) is therefore probably correct in maintaining that 'Ophir
is

here and elsewhere in the Old Testa-

ment southeastern Arabia, along the Persian Gulf.*

For

other views see Die. Bib., art. Ophir. Finally, Yobhabh may well be the district called Yuhaibab or Yuhaibib in

the Sabean inscriptions (Halevy), which Glaser (SGA, 303 ff.,424) locates in the neighborhood of Mecca.

ii.

30. Here, as in v. ii, the author closes with a description of the extent' of the territory over which the family in question spread itself. One of the limits laid down
is

Mesha,

for

which one would most naturally look

in

northern Arabia, where, as has been shown, the Mash of v. 23 and the Assyrian inscriptions must be

* The objection to this conclusion based on i Kgs. x. 22, that the region described is not remote enough, takes for granted that the author of the passage cited had 'Ophir in mind, and that he

and the Yahwist located it in the same region both of which points are open to question. Kittel thinks I Kgs. ix. 26 ff and x. 22 are from different sources, and explains the omission of 'Ophir from the latter passage by supposing that the author did not know
;
.

where

it

was

situated.

264

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
;

[X. 30-32

The other limit, Sephar, therefore, was problocated.* ably in the southern part of the peninsula and, if the phrase the eastern mountain is intended to define its position, more probably at Zafar on the coast of
eastern Hadramaut, than at the place of the
in

same name

Comp. Dillmann. 31. On the formula here used, see v. 20. f 32. This partial summary is followed by one, also by the Priestly narrator, including all the families of the
sons of Noah,
to which is added the statement, that from these, as the larger divisions of the race, all the nations known to the writer dispersed themselves after the Flood.

southern Yemen.

ful as

discussion, although it has not been so fruitmight have been, has made possible an approximately just estimate of the value of the chapter. There can be no doubt that in the past its scientific importance has been overestimated. In the first place, as has been
it

The above

shown,

it is

consisting of a table

not a self-consistent unit, but a compilation by the Priestly narrator, apparently

preserved entire, which has been expanded by sometimes incongruous additions from a Yahwistic source. See the
divergent representations with reference to the origin of the Babylonians and Assyrians and the tribes of the

Arabian peninsula. It will also be remembered that both of the sources employed are sometimes evidently at fault in the relations in which they place the peoples enumerated. Thus, e. g., Misrayim (Egypt) and Kena'an are alike sons of Kush (P), Sidhon and Heth sons of Ke* Glaser (SGA, ii. 420 f .) identifies Mesha, not with Mash, but with the Massa of xxv. 14; but if, as is generally agreed, v. 23 and
xxv. 12-17 are by the t For DiTtlb read

same author (P), this is inadmissible. DrPT23 as in w. 5, 20, 32.

XI.

i]

COMMENTS
(J),

265
;

na'an

although

in

and 'Asshur and 'Elam sons of Shem (P) each case the peoples meant belonged to

and spoke altogether different languages. w. 5 and 32 permit one to suppose although Finally, that the author was acquainted with more peoples than he enumerated, there is no evidence that those not named included either black, brown, or yellow men, or any whites
distinct types

beyond the
located.

limits within

which those named must be

In other words, the table covers only that part of the earth whose northern limit is the Black Sea, its eastern the Caspian, and its southern the strait of Bab el-Mandeb, while its western is Tarshish just outside the
It is plain that a docudimly known Mediterranean. ment so imperfect cannot be regarded as authoritative on the subject of the origin of the peoples into which the race is divided. Still, it is not lightly to be pronounced

worthless.

It

doubtless contains material of interest and

importance to the ethnologist.
ideas underlying
;

it

must

elicit

In any case the religious the admiration of the

thoughtful reader for it teaches (/) that the race is one, and (2) that the rise of the nations and languages was a
part of the divine plan (i. 28), that man should subdue See Ragozin, Chalthe earth, and govern and enjoy it.
dea,
1

3

1

ff

.

The two authors from whose narratives the Table of Nations was mostly compiled agree in teaching that the diversity in language, etc., among mankind is the result This of dispersion to the various quarters of the earth.
was not the only view of the matter current among the Hebrews. A more primitive is taught in the story of i. It be(2) THE CONFUSION OF TONGUES (xi. 1-9). gins with the declaration that at first the whole earth, or all the people on it, were of one language, lit. lip, and

266

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
all

[XI. 1-3

they
2.

had the
this

same words

;

there had thus far not

arisen even dialectic variations

among them.

At

moved

eastward.

time the whole body of primitive men The author does not mention the

The natural inference from the prepoint of departure. context would be that it was 'Ararat, or its vicinceding
ity
;

and

this

view

is

common

(Delitzsch).
;

The

author,

however, can have <had no such thought for the land of Shin'ar, Babylonia, was not eastward, but directly

The text evidently requires that the movement started be sought
/.
<?.,

southward, from the region where the ark grounded. the place from which
to the west of

Baby-

where the author of ii. 8 seems to lonia, have located 'Edhen which means that, when this passage was written, the Yahwistic narrative did not contain an account of the Flood. When the wanderers came to Shin'ar, delighted with the beauty and fertility of the
in Arabia,
:

country,

they abode
;

there, the first of several layers of

immigrants from the same direction. See Meyer, GA, i. 131 f. Rogers, HBA, i. 353 f. 3. Having decided to wander no more, they proceeded To this end, since neither to build themselves houses. stone nor wood in any quantity was within their reach, they resolved to use bricks. The Babylonians of later times employed the same material. Their bricks were of two kinds, sun-dried and kiln-burned. The former were used for cheap buildings, and for the interiors of more

See Ragozin, Chaldea, 39 f. If was desired that a structure be particularly substantial and enduring, the builder would naturally, like those of this story, need burned bricks, and wish to burn them thoroughly. The bricks thus provided were laid, not in
ambitious structures.
it

mortar, but in a stronger cement, the bitumen to this day supplied by the wells at Hit on the Euphrates above

XI.

3,

4]

COMMENTS
See Ragozin, Chaldca, 42
ff.
;

267

Babylon.
L

Rogers,

HBA,

287
4.

f.

materials,

Encouraged by their success in securing proper mankind began to plan larger things. They Now a city, on the supposition aspired to build a city.
that the present passage refers to a later date than
iv.
1

7,

was not an unheard-of enterprise. This, however, was to be a much larger city than that of Hanokh. Moreover, it was to have a tower so high that its top would seern lost in heaven. Towers of this sort, called zikkurats, were common in Babylonia. Many of them had names Thus, one at Lagash was indicating their great height. called " the summit house," * one at Agade " the house " " reaching to heaven f one at Larsa the link of heaven and earth," J etc. See Jastrow, RBA, 616 ff., 639. They were symbolic structures, representing the mountain on which the gods were supposed to dwell (Jastrow, RBA, 612 ff. also Eze. xxviii. 14) and those who erected them
;

;

sought by so doing to obtain the favor of the divinities to whom they were dedicated (Schrader, KB, iii. 2, 6 f ).
.

At

Hethe same time they gratified human pride. brew would naturally regard all such works as products

A

Hence the author of this story repreof a lust for glory. sents the builders of the zikkurat whose erection he is
describing as impelled by the desire to

make themselves

\ E-dur-an-ki. t E-an-dadia. Nabopolassar concludes his account of the reconstruction of the zikkurat of the temple of Marduk in Babylon as follows " Marduk, my lord, look graciously upon my pious deeds. By thy lofty command, which may not be changed, may the work, the product of my hands, endure forever. As the wall of E-temen-an:

throne ki [the name of the tower] is fixed forever, so establish firm to the remotest time. E-temen-an-ki, to the king who restored

my

thee be gracious.

When

Marduk, amid
lord

rejoicing, enters thee,

O

house, proclaim to

Marduk my

my

piety."

268

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[XI. 4-7

a name. This explains the tower. The motive they give for the enterprise as a whole is, lest we be scattered over the face of the whole earth.*
the plan proposed had been adopted and partially executed, Yahweh, the same who brought the animals to 'Adham to see what he would call them (ii.
5.

When

19), and called to him in the garden to know where he was (iii. 9), came down to see the city, but especially the tower,f that the sons of men had built, or, more exactly, had brought to an advanced stage of construction. See v. 8.
6.

He

was not pleased with the

enterprise.

He saw

once whence came the impulse to it. They were one people, and they had the consciousness of strength that must sooner or later come to a united multitude. He
at

saw, too, that this was their first J exploit, only the beginning of the things that they would undertake, unless

Nothing that they plan hard for them.
7.

something was done to check their presumption. to do, he says, will be too

These words seem
by Yahweh on
ix.

to

angels clouds (Am.

his return to his palace

have been addressed to the above the
takes the attendant spirits

6).

He now

into his plan for frustrating the ambition of mankind.
*

The

construction in this verse

is

undoubtedly somewhat con-

fusing, but the naturalness of the tower in the plan of a Babylonian city makes the theory that the text is here composite decidedly

improbable.
lust for

The

fame the motive

analysis proposed by Gunkel, who makes the for building the city, and the dread of
is

separation that for erecting the tower, f Ball omits ViaiDn nSV
j.

certainly mistaken.

For

Dbnn

Ball, following the

Greek Version, reads ibniT

On

SIDTN for

in v. siBVj and,

7,

nb^2>

for

nbh>

see Ges.

67,

R

ii.

XI. 7-9]

COMMENTS
says, let

269

Come, he

us go down,* and there confound

The explanatory clause, so that they their language. will not understand one another's language, must
not be taken too
since such a decree would have rendered the continuance of and abolished the family, It should also be remembered that, the race impossible.
literally,

although, according to x. 25*, the dispersion occurred in the fourth generation after the Flood, the present writer,
since he betrays no knowledge of any such catastrophe, must have thought of mankind as much more numerous when they were scattered than the author of that passage

could have conceived them.
8.

See

vi.

i.

The means proposed was adopted,
v. 9,

for a statement

to that effect, see

and produced the desired result. mankind thence over the scattered Yahweh Thereby face of the whole earth, and, in consequence, they ceased, no longer continued, to build the city.f

See
9.

v.

5.

whether it ever had city thus left unfinished was thenceany other name, the author omits to say forth called Babhel, Babylon, because there Yahweh confounded the language of the whole earth. The idea of the author seems to be, that the name Babhel was derived from the verb rendered confound ;\ but, since Babhel is only another form of the Babylonian compound
Bab-ilu,

The

meaning "the gate of the god," it is probable that, on the contrary, the story here narrated was suggested by the similarity between the two vocables. The re* The transfer of the scene from earth to heaven, it must be admitted, is unexpected, but it hardly seems to warrant the conclusion that this verse is by a different author from v. 5. Comp.
Gunkel.
f

The Samaritans add b"T2n nS1> and
balal.

the tower.

See also

the Greek Version.

270

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
it

[XI. 9

maining materials for

were doubtless gathered from

current reports concerning a ruined tower of immemorial The fact that the author antiquity located in Babylon.

makes the tower a part

of the city

is

overlooked by those

(Delitzsch) who, following Jewish tradition (Ber. Rab. t 172), identify it with the zikkurat of the temple of Nebo

now Birs Nimrud, on the west bank of the Euphrates not far from the capital, finding support for their view in the fact that this tower stood a long time unfinished, and finally fell into ruins, before Nebuchadrezzar restored it.* safer view is that it was the equally famous zikkurat of the temple of Marduk, the tutelar divinity of Babylon, which, after it had long been in ruins,
at Borsippa,

A

Nabopolassar (625-604) rebuilt (Schrader,

KB,

iii.

2, 2 ff.)

and Nebuchadrezzar completed (KB, iii. 2, 30 f., 40 f.). According to a tablet discovered by George Smith ( The Athenceum, Feb. 12, 1876), it was built in stages, with
the sides facing the cardinal points the first stage being 300 ft. square and 1 10 ft. high, the second 260 square and
;

60 high, the third 200 square and 20 high, the fourth 170 square and 20 high, the fifth 140 square and 20 high, the sixth no (?) square and 20 high, while the seventh was the sanctuary 80 by 70 ft. in area and 50 ft. high the en;

tire

height being equal to the length of each side of the " The house base, 300 feet. It was called E-temen-an-ki, of the foundation of heaven and earth." This is the tower
* The great king describes (Schrader,

dition of the structure before

its

KB, iii. 2, 52 ff.) the conrestoration as follows " At that
:

time E-ur-imin-an-ki [the house of the seven divisions of heaven and earth], the zikkurat of Barsip, which a former king had built, raising
it

to the height of forty-two cubits, but not rearing its top, had from a remote date been in ruins. Its gutters had not been kept in order rains and storms had torn down its walls the tiles of its
;
;

facing had burst asunder

;

the bricks of

its

sanctuary had fallen in

heaps."

XI.

9, io]

COMMENTS
its

271

which, in

ruined condition,
futility of

is

here used to illustrate the

wantonness and the

godless ambition.*

In the Priestly narrative the table of the nations was
followed immediately by a genealogy, resembling that of

chapter

v.,

of
b.

The Line

of

Shem

(xi.

10-26).

This time, however, the totals are omitted, also the formal statement in each case, that the given patriarch
died.f
io.

Shem was a hundred years old before he had any

children, older than, according to the correct text, were any of the antediluvian patriarchs except 'Adham, Sheth,

and Noah. The reason for the postponement of paternity in his case was the same as in that of Noah, the When the Flood necessarily limited capacity of the ark.

upon the increase of the family was removed and Arpakhshadh was born. That, since Shem was born after Noah was five hundred years of age, would be in Noah's six hundred and first year, which was the second year of the Flood (viii. 13 f.), or, as the Hebrews expressed it, two years after the Flood. J See ix. 28 f. comp. Holzinger. This interpretation makes the present passage consistent with itself,
over, the restriction

was

that survived

'

;

* The above discussion has made it clear that the story of the tower of Babhel, in the form in which it has been preserved in the Old Testament, is of Hebrew origin. Whether there was an in-

digenous legend on the subject, is, for the present, uncertain. The one reported by Eusebius (PE, ix. 14) as derived from Berosus is but another form of the Hebrew story. f The Samaritans have both items, the Greek Version only the
latter.

\ If, as

Budde (BU, 108
is

f.)

maintains, the last clause

is

a gloss,

the above

simply the glossator's interpretation of the original

author's statement.

272

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[XI. 10-12

it

but renders only more apparent the discrepancy between and x. 22, where 'Arpakhshadh is not the first, but the

third,

son of his father.

The new

difficulty

seems best

met by supposing, with Delitzsch, that, in chapter x., the order is determined by the distribution of the peoples which the sons of Shem there represent. Comp. Gunkel. 11. Shem did not attain the age of any of the antediluvian patriarchs except Hanokh yet he lived, after the birth of 'Arpakhshadh, five hundred years, so that his
;

total
12.

was

six

hundred.

In chapter x. 'Arpakhshadh was one of a number of peoples here the name is treated as if it denoted an He was but thirty-five years old when his individual.
;

son was born. This is an early age as compared with that of Shem, but, when compared with that at which Lemekh and those before him began to beget children, it is none too early to harmonize with the author's theory
first

of a gradual decrease, not only in the length of
life,

human

but in the period preceding paternity.* name Shelah, f see the comment to x. 22.

On

the

* This fact seems to prove that the Massoretic reading, and not Greek Version, a hundred and thirty-five, is the original. The same must be said in the cases of the next five patriarchs, in each of which there is a difference between the Hebrew and the other texts of just a hundred
that of the Samaritan Pentateuch and the
years,

and

in that of the sixth,

where the difference amounts

to only

object in raising the age of paternity doubtless was to lengthen the period between the Flood and the birth of 'Abhram, and thus relieve the reader from the necessity of believing
fifty years.

The

that none of the preceding nine patriarchs died until forty-eight years after this last was bora.
t Here, also, the Greek Version introduces Kainan between 'Arpakhshadh and Shelah, and Dillmann favors this reading. See also Lu. iii. 36. The fact that the number of years assigned, and the length of the periods into which they are divided, are the same

as in the case of Shelah, however, sustains the opinion already ex-

XI. 13-17]
13.

COMMENTS

273

four hundred
first
;

The second period of 'Arpakhshadh's life was long, and three years, in comparison with the
fell

yet the total

considerably short of that of his

father.*
14.

was born.

Shelah had lived only thirty years when 'Ebher On the name and its significance, see the

comment to x. 24. 1 5. The sum of Shelah's years was thirty plus four hundred and three, f or four hundred and thirty-three.
1 6. In the case of 'Ebher the age of paternity is raised to thirty-four without any apparent reason.:f On Felegh his son, see the comment to x. 25.

17. The second period of 'Ebher's life, according to the received text, was four hundred and thirty years but, since the addition of this number would raise his
;

above that of his father or grandfather, and there no other instance of this sort in the table, it is probable that the Samaritans are correct in making the total four hundred and four, and that, therefore, 'Ebher should be
total
is

pressed, that the patriarch

is an importation. His name seems to have been added to make the number in the table ten without that of either Noah or 'Abhram. * In the Samaritan text the hundred or fifty added to the first period is deducted from the second, so that the totals remain un-

Not so in the Greek Version. In this case for four hundred and three the latter has four hundred and thirty making the total five hundred and sixty-five. f For the three hundred and three which one would expect in this case the Greek Version has three hundred and thirty making a total of four hundred arid sixty. The order is \ In w. 12 and 14 the subject precedes the verb. now reversed, and the new construction is used for the rest of the
changed.
', -,

table.

The change does not

that the

names 'Arpakhshadh and Shelah were added
It

favor Budde's suggestion (BU, 413 f.), to the gene-

alogy by the Priestly narrator.

would rather point

to

Rp

as the

supplementer.

See, however, the

comment

to x. 24.

274

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
after

[XI. 17-24
first

represented as living,

the birth of his

son,

three hundred and seventy years.*
1 8. The firstborn of Pelegh was Re'u. The name reminds one of Ruua, the designation for an Aramaean tribe of southern Babylonia frequently mentioned in the

Assyrian inscriptions (Frd. Delitzsch, IVLP, 237 ff. Schrader, KB, ii. 10 f., etc.) ; but it is doubtful if Glaser
;

(SGA,
19.

ii.

408)
x.

is

correct in identifying them.

25 Pelegh is connected with the dispersion. the author here had such a connection in mind, it may explain the abrupt abridgment, with him, of human life

In

If

by nearly two hundred
after the birth of

Re'u only

years, so that his total
nine.
20.
tified

he lived nine f was only two hundred and thirtyyears.
rate,

At any

two hundred and

Serugh, the firstborn of Re'u,
with

is

commonly

iden-

Haran.
22.

Sarug, a district a day's journey north of Comp. Glaser, SGA, ii. 408.
his eldest

The name Nahor, which Serugh gave
a familiar one.

son,

is

Elsewhere

in the

Old Testament,

however, except in the parallel passage in Chronicles (i Chr. i. 26), Nahor is the brother of 'Abhram (v. 26)
bable that this

and the father of the Aramaeans (xxii. 20 ff.). It is proname was added at the same time with and Shelah, when the number was in'Arpakhshadh creased from seven to ten. Comp. Budde, BU, 413 f. 24. Of all the patriarchs Nahor was youngest, only
* This
is

the actual reading of the

to which, therefore, 'Ebher lived in all five

Greek Version, according hundred and four

years.

from the second to the first appear that Re'u and the three following patriarchs lived considerably longer before than after they began to have children.
\

The

transfer of a hundred years
it

period by the Samaritans makes

XI. 24-26]

COMMENTS
when
his
first

275

twenty-nine,*

son was

born.

The

theories with reference to the origin of the name of his son Terah are various, the latest being that of Jensen

(HA,
Tarh.u.
25.

153),

who

identifies

it

with that of a Hittite god,

Here again the second period is unusually shortened, being but a hundred and nineteen years, so that Nahor lived in all only a hundred and forty-eight, f
26.

This

list,

who has

three sons.

like that of chapter v., ends with a father Here, too, as in the preceding case,

the author gives the age, seventy years, of the father when the first son was born. The three sons of Terah

were Abhram, Nahor, and Haran.

'

The

reasons given for doubting the historicity of the

table in chapter v., with a single exception (j), apply to this one. Moreover, by reducing the age of paternity, without correspondingly reducing the total of years, the

author exposed himself to an objection quite as serious as It is also incredible that all the the one he avoided.
persons
taking for granted that the names represent here mentioned, including 'Abhram, were born forty-eight years before any of them died that three of the others outlived 'Abhram and that 'Ebher survived

persons

;

;

* For twenty-nine the Samaritans read seventy-nine, the increase of only fifty being necessary to make the death of Nahor fall in the year before the birth of 'Abhram, and the death of Terah in the
year in which 'Abhram left Haran (xii. 4). See Acts vii. 4. The Greek Version agrees with the Samaritan text so far as the reading seventy-nine is concerned, but in this case the number added has

no

significance.

To

produce the result obtained by the Samaritans

the Greek translators would have had to add sixty to the age of Terah at the birth of "'Abhram as well as to the total of the years of

Nahor. f For a hundred and nineteen the Greek Version has a hundred and twenty-nine, making a total of two hundred and eight.

276

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[XI. 26

seven years after Joseph had been sold into Egypt. The modifications in the Samaritan text and the Greek Version relieve this difficulty, but, as has been shown, create

the one that the original author avoided.*
* The following tables exhibit all the data used in the above discussion and the results deduced from them. The first is a comparative view of the figures representing the two periods of the life of each of the patriarchs, according to the three authorities cited, and their totals ; the variants from the Massoretic text being in

heavy type.
Firstborn

Remainder

Total

H
Shem
'Arpakhshadh
100
35

S
100

G
100

H
500

S
500
..

G
500

H
600
438
..

S
600
438 433

G
600

135

Kenan
Shelah

'Ebher Pelegh Re'u

Serugh

Nahor
Terah

130 134 30 130 32 132 30 130 29 79
30 34
70 70

135 130 130 134 130 132 130 79
70

403
..

303 430

565

330 403 303 330 370 270 370
209 207 200
119
135

..460
404 239 239 230 148
145

433 404 239 239 230
148
145

109 107 IOO

209

207 200

69 75

129
135

460 504 339 339 330 208 205

The second shows

in

what year

after the first of the

Flood each

of the patriarchs, including what year he died.

Noah and 'Abhram, was
Birth-date

born, and in

Death-date

H
Noah Shem
'Arpakhshadh
i

S
..
i

G
..
i

H
350
501

S
350
501

G
350
501

439
..

439
..

Kenan
Shelah 'Ebher
Pelegh Re'u
36 66
loo 130 162
192 221
291

136 266

136 266

Serugh

400 530 662
792
871 941

396 530 660 792 922
looi
1071

469 470 339 369
392

569 670 639 769 882

566 596 726 900 869 999
1122

Nahor Terah 'Abhram

340 366 466

940 1016 1116

1130 1206
1246

XI.

27, 28]

COMMENTS

277

The first general division of the book of Genesis closes with a third genealogy, that of
o.

The Family

of

Terah

(vv. 27-32).

followed by a repetition of the 27. The The first is 'Abhram. of the sons of Terah.
title is

names

He

is

also called
local

'Abhraham.

The
5,

latter

name
it

is

probably a

or

dialectical variation

upon the
interprets

former.

The

Priestly narrator, in xviii. given to the patriarch that

as a pledge he would be " the father of

a multitude of nations."*

Nahor, according
at

to this au-

once drops as comthor the second of his name, his out of as grandfather, not being mensight pletely tioned even in the notice of the migration from 'Ur to

Haran

(v. 31).

having, in x. 22, made 'Aram a brother of 'Arpakhshadh, could not let Nahor remove to Haran and so become, what the Yah wist (xxii. 21)

not far to seek.

The reason The author

for thus dismissing

him

is

he was, the progenitor of the Aramaeans. The suggestion has been made (Wellhausen), that Haran is only another form of Haran but this would imply the idea that Haran was the father of the Aramaeans, an idea that the author could certainly not have entertained. The only son of Haran was Lot, who finally accompanied his uncle 'Abhram to Kena'an (xiii. I2).f 28. This is all that the Priestly narrator has to say of Haran. The Yahwist, from whose work w. 28-30 were
says
;

*
ite

The

original

meaning
it is
i

theory is that alted (Num. xvi.

of the name is doubtful but the favoranother form of 'Abhiram, my father is exas 'Abhner is of 'Abhiner (i Sam. xiv. 50). ff.),
;

On

a corresponding Assyrian name,

Aburamu, see Schrader, KA T,

200, 479.
f Note that P, with his customary regard for the reputation of his worthies, seems to have omitted the obscene legend by which

J accounts for the

Moabites and the Ammonites.

See

xix. 29.

278

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM

[XI. 28-31

taken, says that he died before, in the presence of, and therefore in advance of, Terah his father in the land

of his birth. If no name were given to this land, one would naturally identify it with Mesopotamia for this is called the land of 'Abhram's birth (xxiv. 7), and Haran
;

It is therefore a surprise (xxiv. 10). to find that, according to the text, the land in question was 'Ur of the Kaldeans. In fact this explanatory phrase sounds so strange in this connection that many

the city of Nahor

authorities regard it as an interpolation for the purpose of harmonizing the Yahwistic with the Priestly narrative. See also xv. 7 ; comp. Delitzsch.
29.

The

natural inference from the order in which the

is that Haran was the Yet he seems to have married, and his offspring to have become adult, before his brothers took themselves wives for Nahor married his daughter. 'Abhram chose Saray, who, according to xx. 12 (E), was his half-sister. She is later called Sarah, her name, according to xvii. 15 (P), having been changed at the same time with that of her husband. The name of the wife of Nahor was Milkah. See xxii. 20 ff. Milkah had a

sons of Terah are mentioned

youngest.

;

sister,

Yiskah

;

but she plays no part in the story.

30. In process of time 'Abhram discovered that Saray was barren, a circumstance that furnishes a background for much of the subsequent history of the patriarch.* 31. The rest of the chapter is of Priestly origin, the continuation and conclusion of v. 27. The reason for

the migration of Terah and his family, with the exception of Nahor, f is not given. Tradition seems to teach
* For ibl the Samaritans read "rV/
t
it

The Samaritans,
:

and Saray and Milkah wife of 'Abhram and Nahor his sons.
as follows

feeling this omission, have clumsily supplied his daughters-in-laW) the

XI. 31]
that he left his

COMMENTS
home
xil
If,

279

See Jub.

from 'Ur

of the

to escape idolatrous associations. * however, he originally went forth Kaldeans, it is probable that the

change of residence was occasioned by political considSee erations, perhaps an invasion of the 'Elamites. 135 ff. Meyer, GA, I Rogers, HBA> L 379 ff. 'Ur is no doubt the Uru of the Assyrian inscriptions, one of the most ancient and famous of the cities of Babylonia its history as a religious as well as commercial centre going back nearly four thousand years before the Christian era. Its ruins have been unearthed at Mugheir near the right bank of the Euphrates a little below the site of 'Orekh. See Schrader, KAT, 129 ff. Rogers,
;

;

;

HBA, L tel, Hff

comp. KitThe destination of the emigrants 181 ff. i. was the land of Kena'an but when they reached

370 ff.

;

McCurdy,

HPM,
;

i.

U7f.

;

t

Haran, now Harran, on the
of the

Belias (Belik), a tributary for some reason, perhaps the upper Euphrates, Haran is first feebleness of Terah, they stopped there.

Assyrian records by Tiglath-pileser I. was much older than his time, and it remained an important religious and commercial centre long after the overthrow of the Assyrian empire. See Eze. xxvii. 23 McSchrader, KB, i. 38 f. iii. 2, 96 ff. a seat of like was the f. It, 'Ur, 84 Curdy, HPM,
in the
it

mentioned
(c.

uoo)

;

but

;

;

;

i.

worship of Sin (the moon), a fact that indicates a close relation between the two cities and doubtless explains the route taken by Terah and his family.
* In the Massoretic text the verb is plural and is followed by This is an impossible combination, which must be remedied by reading inH with him, for DfiS with them (Ball) or, better, by changing IS^I to S^1 and he went forth, with the Syriac

DHS.

;

Version, as above, or Q^N IS^.l to On'S S^V1 and he brought themjorth, with the Samaritans and the Greek Version.

280

THE WORLD BEFORE ABRAHAM
to

[XI. 32

32. The Massoretic text gives hundred and five years. So The Samaritans, however, make

Terah a total of two also the Greek Version. the number a hundred

and
ing.
(/)

forty-five,

The
There

and this is probably the correct readreasons for this conclusion are the following
:

is

no other case

in this chapter in

which the

son lives longer than the father. (2) In all other cases the totals are the same in the Massoretic as in the Samaritan text. ( j) It is hardly probable that any one
so careful as the present writer would adopt figures that would make 'Abhram appear to have left his father sixty Substitute the Samaritan for the years alone in Haran. present reading and the year of Terah's death becomes

the seventy-fifth of 'Abhram, the year in which, in obedience to the call of God (xii. 4), the latter continued his See also Acts vii. 4. journey to Kena'an.

APPENDIX
THE BABYLONIAN ACCOUNT OF THE DELUGE; FROM
TABLET XI. OF THE GILGAMESH EPIC
SAID Ut-napishtim to Gilgamesh
:

*

" I will reveal to thee, Gilgamesh, a precious matter 10 And the decree of the gods I will relate to thee.

j

Shurippak, a city

known

to thee,

Lying on the bank of the Euphrates, When that city had become old, the gods in its midst, The great gods, were moved in their hearts to cause a
flood.

15 Therein

were

their father,

Anu,

Their counsellor, the warrior Bel, Their herald, Ninib,
Their leader, Ennugi. The all-wise Ea sat with them, and 20 Their words he repeated to a hurdle Hurdle, hurdle wall, wall
'
! !

:

Man

Hurdle hear, and wall attend of Shuruppak, son of Ubar-tutu,
!

Plan a structure, build a ship 25 Leave riches, look after lives

;
,

Goods

hate,

life

preserve.

Living things of all kinds embark in the ship. The ship that thou shalt build
Its size shall

be measured
its

;

30

Its

width and

length shall correspond
(?) it.'

;

Into the deep launch

The

* For the original transliterated, see Schrader, lines are here numbered as in that work.

KB

t

v\. I,

230

ff.

282
I
' .

APPENDIX
understand and speak to Ea, my lord, my lord, which thou speakest thus,
.

.

perform. 35 [But what] shall I answer the
elders
'

I will respect, I will

city,

the people, and the

?

Ea openeth

his

mouth and speaketh
his servant,

;

He
4

saith to

me

Man, thus

shalt thou speak to

them

:

Bel hath cast

me

off,

he hateth

me

;

therefore

40

I will

Nor

will I lay

not dwell in your city, on the soil of Bel

my head

;

but
lord, will I

I will

go down
dwell.
will
. .

to the deep, with Ea,

my

Upon you
. . .

he pour overwhelming
.

rain.

birds,

fishes,

45

the harvest,

A time

hath Shamash ness ;
shall
rain.'

set,

he who illumineth the dark-

At evening

he cause heaven to pour upon you

heavy
"

As soon

as morning brightened

#

The

On

brought. strong the fifth day I drew its plan. In 120 cubits arose its walls; Likewise 120 cubits was the extent of its top.

KANHISA

60

I

Urtaggip I divided

drew a picture of its front, outlined it to the number of six
;

it.

into seven parts
it

;

divided into nine parts. Plugs against water I drove within it. 65 I provided a rudder, and laid in necessaries. Six sars of bitumen I poured on the outside (?)
inside of
I

The

;

Three sars I put on the inside. Three sars of oil the people who bore
* Seven
lines missing.
t

its

sussul f brought
of

;

Something made

wood

(isu).

APPENDIX
I left

283
;

a sar of

oil,

which the

70

Two

sars of oil the

sacrifices consumed seaman stowed away.
;

I killed

For the people I slaughtered oxen lambs daily. Sirishu, mead, oil and wine

75

gave the people to drink like the water of the river \ feast I made like the day of the new year ; I opened a jar of unguent, thrust my hand into it. In the month of great Shamash the ship was finished.
I

A

Because

is

toilsome

The^ir
80

of the ship of

(?)

KAK MESH above and below

is full (?).

two-thirds thereof.

" All that I had I stowed therein
All the silver I

:

had I stowed therein All the gold I had I stowed therein All the living things I had I stowed therein. 85 I embarked in the ship all my family and my kindred
;
;

:

Cattle of the
'

field,

beasts of the

field,

the artisans,

all

of

A

them, I embarked. time hath Shamash set, and

He who
Go

heaven

illumineth the darkness at evening shall cause to pour out heavy rain.

into the ship

and close the door.'

90 That time

arrived.

He who

illumineth the darkness caused heaven to pour

out heavy rain. When I beheld the face of day, To look upon the day I was afraid.
I

95

To
I

went into the ship and closed my door the pilot of the ship, the seaman Puzur-bel,
;

delivered the structure with
"

its

contents.

As soon
riseth
in

as

morning brighteneth

There

Ramman

from the horizon a dark cloud. the midst of it roareth ;

284

APPENDIX
Nabu and Marduk go before, As heralds they go over mountain and
Uragal looseth the tarkulli; Ninib goeth forth, beginneth the The Anunaki bear torches
plain.

100

conflict

;

105 With whose brightness they make the land glow; Ram man's fury reacheth to heaven,

Turneth every bright thing to darkness.
.
.
.

the land like
the storm

.

.

.

devastated.

One day

no

Swiftly it blew and the water Like a battle upon men One seeth not another
;

.

.

.

mountains

.

.

.

Men
115

The They flee, The gods,
The
'

are not recognized in heaven. gods fear the flood ;

they climb to the heaven of Anu. like a pet dog, cower in kamati.

Ishtar crieth like a

woman

in travail

; :

mistress of the gods, the sweet-voiced, mourneth May that day turn to clay,
I in the

120 Because

assembly of the gods spoke

evil,

When I spoke evil in the assembly of the gods, To destroy my men a conflict decreed, Do I then bear my men, That, as the brood of fishes, they may fill the sea
125

'

?

The gods of the Anunaki weep with her The gods, prostrated, sit weeping
;

;

Their

lips are

covered

.

.

.

a bu ah re

e

ft.

" Six days and nights The wind bloweth, the flood, the storm, overwhelmeth the land.

130

When

abateth

the seventh day arriveth, the storm, the flood, the conflict, ;
the tempest, the flood,

Which it fought like an army. The sea rested, retreated, and
ceased.

APPENDIX
When
But
135
all

285

I

mankind

behold day, the noise are turned to

is stilled,

clay.

When

daylight came, I prayed ; I opened the window, the light
face.
I

fell

upon the
:

side of

my

am

Over the

crushed, and I seat myself and weep side of my face flow my tears.
:

I looked upon the world, wide-spread was the sea. 140 Twelve leagues distant an island rose For Mt. Nisir the ship made.

Mt. Nisir held the ship fast, and did not let day, a second day, Mt. Nisir, KI MIN A third day, a fourth day, Mt. Nisir, etc. ; 145 A fifth, a sixth, Mt. Nisir, etc. When the seventh day arrived, I brought forth and released a dove The dove went, it returned

it
;

rise

:

One

;

;

There was no
150
I

resting-place, therefore

it
:

came back.

brought forth and released a swallow The swallow went, it returned ;

There was no
I

resting-place, therefore it came back. brought forth and released a raven The raven went, and, when it saw that the water was dry;

ing up,

155 It
I

ate, ishahhi, itarri,

but

it

did not
;

come back.
an offering.
;

I sent forth to the four

winds

I offered

placed an altar on the top of the mountain By sevens vessels I set
:

1

Into them I poured cane, cedar, and asu, 60 The gods smelled the odor; The gods smelled the pleasant odor
;

The

gods, like

flies,

gathered over the offering.

" As soon as the mistress of the gods arrived, She held up the great necklace that Anu made for her adornment 165 'Ye gods, as I shall not forget the ornament of my neck,
:

286

APPENDIX
So these days shall I remember and not forget forever. Let the gods come to the altar, But let Bel not come to the altar, Because without consultation he caused a flood,

170

And my
"

people he devoted to destruction.'
as Bel arrived

As soon

And saw

the ship, Bel was angry ; He was filled with wrath at the gods, the Igigi ' Hath there any soul escaped ?

:

175

Not a man should have survived destruction.' Ninib openeth his mouth and speaketh,
Saith to the warrior Bel, 1 Who but Ea deviseth aught
;

Ea also knoweth every art.' 180 Ea openeth his mouth and speaketh,
Saith to the warrior Bel
'
:

Thou

Why,

counsellor of the gods, warrior, why, didst thou without consultation cause the flood ?

185

On the sinner lay his sin, On the offender lay his offence
Show mercy,
lest

;

he be destroyed, have patience, Instead of causing a flood Let the lion come and decimate men ; Instead of causing a flood Let the jackal come and decimate men 190
;

lest

.

.

Instead of causing a flood Let a famine occur and the land Instead of causing a flood

.

.

.

Let Ura come and devastate the land. 195 I did not reveal the decree of the great gods ; I caused Atrahasis to have a dream, and the decree of the gods he heard.'

When now

he had taken a resolution,

Bel boarded the ship.

He

seized

my hand

and brought me forth ;

APPENDIX
200

287

He brought
side
;

forth

my wife and

caused her to kneel at

my

He
'

turned toward us, took his place between us, blessed us
:

Hitherto Ut-napishtim hath been a

man

;

Now
And
205

Ut-napishtim and his wife shall be like us, the gods, Ut-napishtim shall dwell afar at the mouth of the
rivers.'

They took me and
caused

afar at the

mouth

of the rivers they

me

to dwell."

INDEXES
I.

TOPICS TREATED.
ANALYSIS:
Gen.
of Gen.

xxi.-xxx., 37; of
f.

39

ff.,

63

;

composition, 45
,

ff.

;

rela-

i.-xi.,
:

68

ff.
;

tion to J

and

51.
its

Angels God,"

at creation, 109

as

"

sons of
of

Deuteronomy, on
6
ff.,

own

authorship,

191 ; at tongues, 268.

the

confusion

41

ff.

^(Anthropomorphisms
30
;

:

absence from P,

prevalence in J, 32. Apostles as witnesses to the authorship of the Pentateuch, 14 f.

Diet of primeval man, 112, 156, 221. Documentary Hypothesis : origin and history, 25 f statement, 28 ff. preva. ; ;

y

lence, 28, 36

;

result of its acceptance,

66

f.

Ark, comparative size
Article, in

of, 198.

Hebrew,

5, 9.

Duplicate narratives in the Pentateuch, 17 ff.
Elohistic
f.

V

" Book of Jashar," 65. " Book of the Wars of Yahweh," 65

Document
f.
;

:

characteristics, 32
32, 52

f.

discovery, 26, 28 ; relation to J, ;

age, 51

ff.,

63

;

relation to

V Chronicles,

on the authorship of the Pentateuch, 10 ff. "\ \yChronology of the Pentateuch comparison of texts and versions, 187,
etc.,
:

composition, 64 ff. Ezekiel and the Priests' Code, 60
;

D, 52

f.

f.

Ezra: restorer of the Hebrew Scriptures, 14
;

relation to the Pentateuch,

276
275

;

historical value, 20

f.,

188

6iff.
ff.,

f.

Clean and unclean, 202, 218, 221.
]X

Fall, story of, its value, 159.

Composite narratives
19
ff.,

in the Pentateuch,

False prophets, 44.

63
:

f.,

196

ff. ff.

Flood:

duration,
f.
;

Creation

Genesis and geology, 115 the two accounts compared, 140.
37
ii.

story, 225
;

216; value of the Babylonian account of,
f.

225

f.,

281

ff.

\^

Critics, schools of,

ff.

Fragmentary Hypothesis, 21

!^C

God

Day

in

Gen.

i.

i-

3,

100
:

(?Elohim) in the Pentateuch, 17,

f.

N^Deuteronomic
ery, 9, 40, 45,

Document
49
;
;

its

discov-

22, 29, 33, 96.

relation to Deuter;

Hexateuch, use of the term,

3, 54.

34 recognition by de Wette, 24; age,
45
characteristics, 23,
.

onomy,

Image

of

God,

no

f.,

177. ./

290

INDEXES
Prophets
:

Images: forbidden in Deuteronomy, 9 f., 47 tolerated in earlier docu;

the

former,

i,

8

ff.

;

the

later, 10.

ments, 54

f.

Inspiration, limitations of, 16.
: familiarity with D, 39 ; relation to P, 60. Jesus and the Pentateuch, 14 f., 15 f.

Rainfall in Palestine, 206.

Jeremiah

"

Second person in Deuteronomy, 46 ff. Sons of God," value of the story of,
195
f.

Joshua, relation
3,54Light,

of, to

the Pentateuch,

Supplementary
23
f.
;

Hypothesis
f.

:

engirt*'

overthrow, 27

Hebrew conception
ff.

of,

98

f.,

104

Table of nations, value of, 264 f. Talmud on the authorship of the Pentateuch, 12 f. Titles of the Priestly
177, 196, 234, 271.

\ -Moses

the growth of the tradition ascribing to him the authorship of the
:

Document,

119,

Pentateuch, 4

ff.

;

the earliest testi;

mony
in

Hebrew

concerning him, 10 history, 66 f.

his place

Tradition, value of, 17. Translation of Gen. i.-xi., 73

ff.

Patriarchs, longevity of, 188

ff.
;

Worship, centralization of, in Deuteronomy, 10, 40, 44 f., 48 f.
Yahvoeh in the Pentateuch,
53,
1

\ Pentateuch
sions, 2
f.

:

;

names, i f., 4, 14 f. diviwarrant for the name, 3
;

17, 22. 29,

traditional authorship, 4

ff.

;

structure
ff.

20,

1 60,

176.
:

and composition, 16
Priestly
i7ff.,

ff.

;

age, 36

Yahwistic Document

characteristics,

Document
29
:

:

characteristics,
ff.,

ff.;

age, 58

63.

Proper names, transliteration of, iv f. Prophet the title, 41 his work, 43 f.
;

17 ff., 31 f., 53 ; relation to E, 32, 52 j extracts in Gen. xxi.-xxx., 37 age, 51 ff., 63 ; relation to D, 52 f. j com;

j

position, 64

ff.

types, 43

f.

II.

BOOKS AND AUTHORS CITED.
[Figures in parentheses indicate the

number

of times an author

is

referred ta

on a

particular page.]

Aben Ezra, Com., 96. Adam and Eve, Book
a Bicycle, 211, Arabic Version, 82,
Astruc,
Jean,
25,.

Baba Bathra
of, 191.

;

see

Talmud.

Allen and Sachtleben, Across Asia on

Bacon, B. W., Genesis of Genesis, v, 29. 33> 37, S3, I26 155. * 6o 2 57> 260 ;
>

JBL,
146, 178.

53

;

Triple

Tradition of the
Beitrdge zur sem.

Exodus,
sur
la

6, 29, 33, 45, 53, 65.

Conjectures

Baethgen, Fried.,

Genese,

27.

Augustine,

De

Genesi

ad

Litteram,

1

7,

Religionsgeschichte, 170, 171, 172. Ball, C. J., Gen., 103 (2), 104, 112, 114,
146,

152

(2),

157, 161,

163, 165 (3),

INDEXES
170(2), i;i, 177, 185, 192
199, 213 (2), 214, 2l8,
(2), 196,

291
C. R.,

Conder,

The Bible and

the

221,

222, 228

(2), 251, 268 (2), 279; Light from the East, 98 (2), 99, 102, 107, 109,

East, 238. Cornill, C. H., Einl. in das A. T.,
37, 45, 49, 53, 54, 57, 61, 65, 175.

3,

113, 121, 123, 133,

158, 238, 245 (2),
sent.

Cory,

I.

P.,

Ancient Fragments,
P.,

102,

24 6

(2),

252.

108, 113, 189, 211, 217.

Baudissin,

W.

W., Studien zur
10.

Crawford, T.

The Patriarchal Dy-

Religionsgeschichte, 96, 98, 106, 120.

nasties, 179.

JMirman, Georg, Dan.,
Benziger,
J.,

Heb. Archaeologie, 171,

Dana,
book,

J.

D.,

Manual, 115;

Text-

172, 198.

r 1 6.

Bereshith Rabba, no, in, 138, 143,
167, 270.

Davidson, A.

B., Eze., 262.

Dawson,

J.

W., Eden Lost and Found,
Franz,
Com.,
119,
v,

Berosus

;

see Cory.

115, 188, 206.

Berry, G. R.,

Am.

Jour, of Sem.
10.
;

Lan-

Delitzsch,
102,
109,

97,

101,
142,

guages, etc., 192. Bevan, A. A., Dan.,

no,

125,

138,

146(2), 147, 150, 153, 163, 176, 179,

Bleek, Fried., Aph. Beitr'dge, 54 in das A. T., Eng., 3 (2), 23.
237, 238, 258.

Einl.

181, 183, 192, 193, 194, 207, 208, 221,

229, 231,
278.

242,

257,

266,

270,

272,

Bochart, Sam., Geographia Sacra, 130,

Delitzsch, Fried., Gesch. Babyloniens

Boscawen,
the
168, 225.

W.

St. C.,
2,

The Bible and
106,
118,
159,

u. Assyriens, 131, 245

;

Hebrew and

Monuments,

Assyrian, 104, 139; Wo lag das Parodies, 120, 123, 124, 128(2), 129,
130
(3),

Bottcher, Fried., Lehrbuch, 120, 181,

131,

X 32

(2),

133

(3),

158,

217; Aehrenlese, 165.
Briggs, C. A.,
15, 17;

168, 235, 236,

244

(2),

246

(2),

247,

Higher Crit. of the Hex., Mes. Prophecies, 231.
114, 123, 139.

248, 249, 259, 260, 274. Diet, of the Bible (Hastings), 130, 131
(2), 133, 158, 161, 168, 172,

Brown, Francis, Lex.,
130.

210, 211,

Brugsch, Hein., Persische Reise, 128,
Bruston, Ch., Les deux Jeh oviste, 35.

235, 237, 243 (2), 244, 251 (2), 253,

262

(2), 263.
v, 29, 37,

Dillmann, Aug., Gen.,

109,

Budde, Karl, Bib.

Urgeschichte, 35,

no,

120, 124, 128, 130, 132, 135, 138,

121, 126 (2), 135, 147, 155, 160, 164, 169 (3), 172, 173, 74, 75 ( 2 ), 181, 182,
184,

139, 140, 146, 147 (2), 150, 160, 164, 166, 167, 169, 170, 171, 176, 181, 185, 199, 202, 209, 212
,

185,

188,

191,

192,

193,

192

(2), 193,

194,

194, 207, 208, 209, 212, 213, 228, 230 (2), 2 3 I, 2 3 2 (2), 247, 257, 271, 273, 274; Richt. u. Sam., 3, 43,
54-

22 9 2 3 I, 234, 237, 2 49, 255, 264, 272 Num. Deu. u. J s 35, 3 6 3 8 ( 2 ), 42, 48, 49, 5 2 ( 2 ),
(2), 2l6, 2l8, 224,
; ,

58.

Calvin, John, Com., 128, 130.

Cheyne,

T. K., Enc. Bib., 158, 168, 169, 170 (2), 171, 258; Isa., 250;
198.

Driver, S. R., Deu., 39, 41, 42, 43, 46 Int. to the Lit. of (2), 47, 48, 253 the O. T., 3, 29, 30, 33, 34, 43, 45,
;

51, 52, 65

ZA W,
Clarke,

Heb. Text of Sam., 152 Tenses, 120; Studia Biblica, 120.
;

;

Colenso,

Adam, Com., 167. The Pent, and J. W.,
24, 39.

the

Ebers, Georg, Aegypten u. die Bilcher

Book ofJos.,

Moses, 241

(3),

250

(3), 251 (3).

292
Eichhorn,
27.
J.

INDEXES
G., Einl. in das A. T.,

Green,

W.

H.,
;

Hebraica,
Crit.
;

36; Heb.

Feasts, 36
100,

Higher
36,

ofthe Pent.,

Encyclopedia Biblica,

130

(2),

4, 5, 7, 16, 29, 36,

41

Moses and the
;

158, 161, 168, 169, 170 (2),

171, 185,

Prophets,
Genesis, 36.

60,

61

Unity of

189, 225, 226, 230, 241, 244, 246, 252,

258, 259.

Gunkel, Hermann, Gen.,
4,
8,

v,

in,

135,

English Version,

102, 103,

107,

114, 115, 120(2), 138.

Enoch, Book of, 183, 191. Erman, A., ZAW, 251 (2). Eusebius Pamphili, Prep. Evangelica,
271.

161, 205, 268, 269, 272; Schopfung v. Chaos, 99 (2), 106, 108, 118. 113,

146,

152,

Guyot, Arnold, Creation, 99, 107
115.

(2),

Ewald, Hein., Gesch. Israels, 27 Heb. Sprache, 108.
French, R. V.
Fiirst,
Jul.,

(2)

;

Hal6vy,

J.,

Jour. Asiatique, 242, 263.
to the

Harman, H. M., Intr. the Holy Scriptures,
Harper,
(2)
;

Study of

4, 7, 16.

;

see

Lex Mosaica.
des A. T., 2

W.

R., Hebraica, 36.
T., Hist. -krit.

Kanon
(2).

Hartmann, A.
gen, 22.

Forschun122;
161.

Lex., 151

Geddes, Alex., Bible, 21 (2), 54. Gesenius, Wil., Gesch. der heb. Sprache,
39
;

Haupt, Paul, Am. Or. Soc., Sacred Books of the O. T., 29,
Hensler, C. G.,
u. Gen., 178.

Bemerkungen

iib.

Pss.

Gram.,

5,

96

(2),

97,

103,

104,

108(2), 113, 114, 115, 122, 129, 138, 139, 140, 144 (2), 145, 152, 162 (2),
164, 166, 171, 173, 174, 177, 206, 207, 212, 228 (2), 229, 230.
199,

Herder,
'73-

J. G.,

Spirit of Heb. Poetry,
6. 3,

Hobbes, Thos., Leviathan,
29, 63,

Holzinger, H., Einl. in den Hex.,

Ginsburg, David, Bib. Hebraica, 192. Glaser, Ed., Skizze der Gesch. Arabiens, 129, 130, 241, 242 (4), 243 (2),

3,

32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 45
;

(

2 ), 61,
148, 186,

121

Gen., v, 69
157, 169,

(2),

119,

15,

*54,

173,

181,

244,

260
(2).

(3),

262

(7),

263

(2),

264,

209, 213, 216, 219, 223, 228, 235, 240, 249, 2 56, 271.

274
Graf,

K. H., Die geschichtl. Biicher

Hommel,
131
(2).

Fritz,
1

Ancient Heb. Tradi;

des

A.

T., 37.
59, 73 (3),
(3),

tion, 129,

88, 245

Die. of the Bible,

Greek Version,
77
(6), 78,

74

(4),

75

(5),

79

80, 81, 82, 83,

84
(2),

Hupfeld, Herm., Die Quellen der Gen.,
27.

(2),

85

(5),

86

(2), 87,

88

(3),

89

91

9 2 > K' 1 , I03 ( 2 ), I04 (2), i5 IO7, 112 (3), 113, 119, I2O, 121, 131, I3 6 ( 2 )> *37, *3 8 '39 (2), 143. *44,
(3).

Ilgen, C. D.,

Die Urkunden desjerus.
(2), 27, 119, 192.

Tempelarchivs, 26
Jastrow, Morris,
Jr.,

146, 150, 151, 152 (2),

153,

156, 157,

160, 161, 164, 170, 171 (2), 172, 175,

The Religion of
98,

176 202

(2),
(2),

186, 187, 189, 194,

197, 200,

Babylonia

and

Assyria,

102,

204, 205 (2), 206, 209, 210, 211, 213, 2I 4 , 215, 2l8, 220, 223, 228, 2 35 2 36, 237, 239, 241 (3), 246, 250,

105, 107, 113, 183, 191, 225, 226, 244
(2), 248, 267 (2). Jensen, P., Hittiter u. Armenier, 275 ; Kosmologie, 98, 102 (2), 103, 122,

2 53> 257, 260 (2), 261, 262, 268, 269, 271, 272 (2), 273 (2), 274, 275 (3),
276, 279, 280.

'33-

Johns, C.

W.

H.,

The Expositor,

198.

INDEXES
Josephus, Fl. Antiquities of the Jews,
f

293
241, 247, 250, 251, 257 (2),

239

(3),

13, 128, 130,

191, 237, 238 (2), 258;

258, 259, 261, 266, 279.

Cont. Apion, 13.
Jubilees,

Mitchell,

H.

G.,

Am.,

205,

246
Jud.,

;

JBL,
3,

Book

of,

no,

134,

141,

143,

46, 47, 48.

191, 2 37.

Moore, G.
55,

F.,

JBL., 64

;

42,

93, 253C.,

Kautzsch, Emil, The Lit. of the O. T.,
69.
Keil, C. F., Einl. in

Movers, F.

Die Phbnicier,

238.
109,

das A.

T., 4, 7, 41,

Murphy, J. G., Gen., 99 (2), 37, H4, 179, 188, 190,
224.

105,

191,

209,

42, 43; Gen., 128,162, 224, 245. Kelle, K. G., Vorurtheilsfreie Wiirdi-

gungdermos.
Kittel, Rud.,

Schriften, 23.
3,

Nestle,

E.,

Marginalien

u.

Mate-

History of the Hebrews,
279
;

rielien, 152, 222.

36, 38, 42, 52 (2), 58, 65,

Kbn.,

263.

Noldeke, Theodor, Unterss. zur Kritik des A. T., 185.

Klostermann, A., Sam. u. Kbn., 54 Pentateuch, 28.

;

Nowack, W., Klein. Propheten,
Olshausen,
138, 214.
J.,

61.

Knobel, A., Gen., 112, 115, 250. Konig, Ed., System der heb. Syntax,
'43-

Beitrage zur Kritik des

iiberlieferten Textes

im Buche

Gen.,

Kosters, W. H., Herstel het pers. Tijdvak,6$.

van Israel in

Onkelos, Targum, 86, 161, 211, 238. Origen, Cont. Celsum, 15.
Ovid, Met., 112.

Kuenen, Abrarn, Origin and Composition of the Hex., 34, 35, 37, 3 8 4^,
>

47, 49, 55, 61 (2)

;

Theol. Tijdschrift,

Oxford Hexate.uch (Carpenter, Harford-Battersby, and others), v, 29,

192.

3,
;

3 2 , 33

(2), 34,

35,

39, 45, 5 1

(

2 )>

52, 57, 61, 63, 64, 175.

de Lagarde, Paul, Onom. Sacra, 198 Orient alia, 170.

Peiser,

Felix,

Zeitsch. fiir

Assyri-

Le

Conte, Jos.,

Elements of Geology,

ologie, 131.

189.

Petrie,

Lenormant, Frang., Beginnings of His-

in, 135, 138, 158 (2), 170 (3), 173, 175, 181, 182, 211, 216. Lex Mosaica, 16, 36, 60, 61.
tory,

F., Hist, of Egypt, 244, 254 (2). Philo Judaeus, Works (Bohn), 13, no,

W. M.

191.

Luther, Martin,
161.

Gen.,

151

;

Version,

Piepenbring, Ch., Theology O. T., 120, 135, 137.
Pliny, Hist. Naturalis, 130.
Pressel,

of the

W., Stimmen der Volker,

128,

Maspero, G. C. vaux, 238 (2).

C.,

Receuil de Tra-

130.

Ptolemy, Geographia, 242.
History, Prophecy,
131, 133, 232,

McCurdy,

J.

F.,

and
246 279

the
(2),

Monuments,
247
(2),

248, 252, 253, 259,

(2).

Ragozin, Z. A., Assyria, 123, 234, 235 (2), 236, 245, 257 Chaldea, 257, 265, 266, 267 Media, etc., 258.
;

;

M6nant,

Joach.,

Annales des Rois
des Alterthums,
(4),

d'Assyrie, 249. Meyer, Ed., Gesch.

Rashi, Com., 96, 160, 191. Rask, R. C., Ilgen's Zeitsch. fiir hist.
Theologie, 178.

"3'

234

(3),

235

236

(2),

237,

von Raumer, Karl, Palastina,

128.

2 94
Rawlinson,
237-

INDEXES
George, Ancient

Egypt,

Keuss, Ed., 37 Das A. T., 141, 161 Gesch. des A. T., 49.
;

;

Smith, George, Assyrian Discoveries, 246 ; The Athenaum, 270. Smith, G. A., Histor. Geography of
the

Rice,

W. N.

;

see Dana.
T., 41
;

Smith,

Holy Land, 255. W. R., The O. T. in the Jewish
49, 60, 61, 65, 66
(2).
;

Riehm, Ed., Einl. in das A.

Church,
Spinoza,

Religion
Theo-

Handworterbuch des
172, 198.

bib.

Altertums,

of the Semites, 222
Benedict,

Traotatus

Rogers,

R. W., Hist,
247, 249,

of Babylonia
(2),

logico-politicus, 21 (2).

and
246,

Assyria, 234, 235, 236

245,

Spurrell, G.

J.,

Gen., 145.

257

(2),

266,

267,

Stade, Bernh.,

De

Populo Javan, 250

;

279
bib.

(2).

ZAW,
Handbuch der
54-

69, 168, 175.
J. J.,
;

Rosenmiiller, E. F. K.,

Alterthumskunde, 130.

UntcrsuchStahelin, ungen, 54 Einleitung in das A. T.,
Kritische
Steuernagel, Carl,
175, 176.

Ryle, E. F., Early Narratives of Gen.,
118, 159.

Deu.

u. Jos., 50 (2),

Samaritan Pentateuch,
(2), 78, 79, 80, 81, (4),

75 (2), 76, 77
84,

Strack, H. L., Gen., 112, 114, 119, 150,
163,'

83,

85

(4),

86

165, 197.
73,

88

(3),

89

(2),

112

(2),

121,

128,
I 44 ,

91 (2), 105, 108, I2 9 (2), I 3 6, 137,
I 4 6,

Syriac Version,
(2),

75

(2),
(2),

80, 81,83, 84, 85 (3),

86

77 (3), 78, 88 (2), 89
139,
143,

138, 139 (2),

151,

152

(2),

92, 94,

"I, in,

112,

155, 161, 163, 165, 175, 176, 181, 182,

144, 149, 151, 152, 165, 175, 178, 197,

183 202

(2),

184, 186, 187, 196, 200

(2),

200, 202 2l8.

(2),

204, 206, 209, 211, 213,

(2), 203,

204, 205 (2), 206, 207,
(2),

210, 213, 217, 220, 223, 233, 236 239, 244, 256
(3),
(2),

259, 260, 26l, 262
(2),

Talmud,

12, 133.

269, 271, 272, 273, 274

275

Targum

to Ezekiel, 238.

(2), 276, 278 (2), 279, 280 (3). Sayce, A. H., Hibbert Lectures, 168, 170; Races of the O. T., 169,

Tatian, Diatessaron, 63.
Tertullian,

234-

Adv. Hertnogenem, 17; Adv. Marcionem, 191. Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs,
191.

Schrader, Eberh., Einl. in das A. T.,
54
;

Keilinschriften u. das A. T., 98,

Thorns,
188.

W.

J.,

Human

Longevity,
the

118, 120, 124, 158, 159, 162, 210, 211,

(2),

225 (Eng.), 237, 243, 246, 247, 248 254 (3), 258, 277, 279 ; Keilin-

Thomson, W. M., The Land and

schriftl. Bibliothek,

98

(2),

99,

102,

Book, 255 (2). Tiele, C. P., Babylonisch-assyrische
Geschichte, 246.

107, 109, 113, 121, 123, 129, 133, 183,

191, 198, 199, 2O6, 2O7, 21

1,

212, 213,

Torrey, C. C., Ezra-Nehemiah, 63.

2l6, 2l8, 220, 224, 234 (2), 235 (2), 236, 237, 2 3 8 (9), 243, 244, 245 (4 ),

Tosaphoth, 133.

246
(3),
(3),

(5),

247, 248 (5), 249, 253, 254

258, 259, 260 (2), 262, 2 74, 279, 281.

267, 270

Toy, C. H., Eze., 250 JBL., 118. Tristram, H. B., Land of Israel, 255 Nat. Hist, of the Bible, 198.
;

;

Tuch, Fried., Gen.,
Umbreit, F.
161.

25, 120, 163, 193.

Schultz, Herm., Alttestamentl. Theologie, 141.

W.

C.,

Stud. u. Krit. t

Siegfried u. Stade, Lex., 228.

INDEXES
Valeton,
Vater, J.
J. J. P.,

295

ZAW,
(2),

200.

Westphal, Alex., Sources
teuque, 46.

du Penta-

S.,

Com., 22.
81, 86, 129, 136,

Vergil, Georgica, 112.

de Wette,

W. M.
;

L.,

Dis. critico-exe-

Vulgate, 31, 75, 77

139, 151, 205, 213, 241.

Einl. in das A. T., 54. Wildeboer, G., Letterkunde des ouden
getica, 24

Verbonds,

3.

Weber, Ferd., Paidstinische Theologie,
147.

Winckler, Hugo, Mittheilungen der vorderas. Gesellschaft, 238 (2), 241.
Zeydner, H.,

IVellhausen, Jul., Comp. des Hex., 37
(2), 43, 45, 53, '9 2 , 231, 244, Israelit. u. jiid. Gesch., 62

256
;

(2)

;

Gesch.

Zunz,

L.,

LA W, 161. ZDMG, 39.

Israels, 43, 60, 61, 126, 277; Skizzcn u. Vorarbeiten, 10.

III.

ISOLATED PASSAGES EXPLAINED.
Gen. Ex.
xxxvi. 2
xvii. 14

253
5

i

Kgs.

viii.

53

54 263 44

X. 22
Isa.
ix.

xxi. 13 xxxiv. 28

51
5 f.

15/14

xlvi. 10

96
250 60
f

Num.
Jos.

xiii.

33

194

Ixvi. 19

xi. 3
"i- 3
viii.

253

Jer.

vii.

22

Jud.
i

253
55

xxv. 20
xlvi.

260 250 250 250 i52f

27 Sam. u. 22
x. 25

9
5

59
152

Eze.
Cant.

xxvii. 10

xxx.
vii.

2 Sam. xvii. 3
i

n/io

Kgs.

viii.

4

59

f.

296

INDEXES
IV

HEBREW WORDS DISCUSSED

D>J-

P

($be fiitertfbe
Electrolysed and printed by

H.

O.

Houghton

&

Co.

Cambridge, Mass., U.S. A.

University of Toronto

Library

Acme

Library Card Pocket

Under Pat. "Ref. Index File"

Made by LIBRARY BUREAU

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful